I guess this is the first time that Kanye West's Twitter was used for something good?
Kanye had shared before that The Life Of Pablo was always intended to be a "living breathing changing creative expression," and he used this as a fact to explain that there were going to be "post-release alterations."
According to TMZ, the lawsuit was accusing Kanye of backing out on the promise to keep The Life Of Pablo on Tidal exclusively, and not send it out to the likes of Apple Music or Spotify. The suit response from Yeezy says that it was conning people into getting Tidal on the basis of the fact that it was the only place they could hear his new album in February of 2016.
The changed album is the only version that is out on other streaming sites, but he insists that the original work is on Tidal only.
To be fair, I can see both sides. If someone can get the album anywhere else, even with its updates, they probably will, versus shelling out the extra for a stream of the "original content." What if the new content is better content than the original?
Personally, I just like to have my music all in one place rather than try and get it on all sorts of different places because of it's exclusivity, and I know for a fact that I'm not alone in saying that if it's not on the provider that I use, that either forces me to buy the album outright versus partake in streaming, or I just end up not listening to it.
What's your take? Do you give in to getting streaming services because you want to hear a specific album? Or do you drop the service once the free trial is up in hopes that the album will be released to buy, versus having to pay a monthly fee to hear your music?
Sound off in the comments.
Amy Cooper is the type of journalist that when asked "What do you bring to the table," she replies "I am the table.