because
1. Diddy wasn't trying to abolish a free-mium model and force a pay-only model
2. Diddy didn't try to sell it under the guise of "artists need to make more money"
For this to be a corollary example Diddy would've had to assemble some artists, pull their videos from Youtube for Revolt only, and have a PPV model where you have to pay a nominal fee to see Revolt like an HBO channel.
At the end of the day, Diddy just launched a dying artform (music videos are borderline pointless now) on a dying platform (cable tv based music).
But Pandora, Spotify, Google Music, and Itunes Radio all do these same things as far as a pay for service? Google not only wanted me to pay after a trial but when I stopped paying they fukked up my app for the music I already own....that shyt would crash and be difficult to get around just so you would feel like you were missing out....
No one is that pissed over 'the artists need to make more money' that isn't an industry person. I don't care if they are making more money to the point I am going to write all these articles. Are you so mad at that statement that you would rally the media to do that? Only thing that motivates people like that is MONEY. Either getting it or losing out on it. Not because they feel artists are already rich enough.
Diddy is launching in a space that isn't competitive for the feature in front of RUTHLESS software companies.
