Thi. What's greedy is consumers expecting to get music for free. You wouldn't ask any other profession for free handouts of their product without ever having to pay a dime, so why should musicians be expected to give out the music they spilled countless hours of their lives into?

Also some of you should do some research. Not every musician makes millions off a song. In fact most people in the music industry barely make ends meet, even worse with the abysmal rates spotify pays out. This whole anti-spotify revolution is about getting fair payment for everyone involved in a song, not just the big name artist: they're going to come out with a big check either way.

These Tidal founders should just remove all their music from Spotify. Then people can pay to hear it on Tidal for the same price (in non HQ subscription plan). Spotify has a freemium option, but I doubt that will last very much longer. Lucian Grainge, CEO of Universal Music Group, has recently said that he doesn't see freemium or ad-supported streaming as sustainable and he is trying to encourage the transition to paid streaming. Sony CEO Doug Morris has also recently hit out at free streaming. UMG and Sony will probably try and force Spotify to change their business model and introduce various limits on their free service. Spotify will have to comply or will face losing the music portfolios of UMG and Sony at the very time when the major competition is springing up in the face of Youtube MusicKey and iTunes Beats Streaming.

Technically its not greedy; but I do know that when it comes down to it all, the idea is coming from a greedy place. People like Jay Z are GREEDY, and I hope this Tidal thing is a major failure.

Yes, it is.

I don't think it matters much though, as Tidal is already flopping.