First, if you want to be taken more seriously, you may want to drop some of those F-bombs and start leaning how to spell.

Second, I never made any argument that Spotify can’t legally do what it wants. It can. My argument was that it shouldn’t, viz., shouldn’t start picking and choosing musical artists on the basis of their personal conduct or political views, because that takes Spotify down a slippery slope, which I discussed.

You can disagree with that, if you want, but you haven’t. Instead, you went on an irrelevant knee-jerk libertarian rant about Spotify’s rights as a business, and how I should buy stock in it if I wanted to make decisions on its behalf. Obviously, you missed the point. Stockholders are not the only ones who can make decisions affecting a private company’s choices. Consumers of the company’s products can make such decisions as well, and thus, there is a point in writing articles like the one I wrote to attempt to influence those decisions as well as to attempt to persuade the company (and other companies in a similar situation) that it’s not in their best interests to do the sort of thing that Spotify did.