This is just rationalizing. The system as it exists today provides him with virtually no rights over his work. Also, what right is more reasonable for a creator to claim than the right to price and market their work on their terms? This whole message board is full of people who post "Show HN" stories about their random weekend projects priced at $9.99/mo.
(This comment was overly strident; preface all sentences with "I think" and add an implied "we", because I've been just as guilty of this rationalization as the rest of us.)
The core point here: there was an old system with some control over distribution. There is a new system that dictates terms to artists, and those terms are "your content will be free to all comers online, and you can compete with other businesses to derive value from it".
When Apple applied the same terms to the app store, people freaked. And app developers had a choice of whether to deliver on the app store!
Right. I guess what I'm not seeing is how it could be any other way, given the economic incentives and technical landscape. This argument sails awfully close to begging humans not to be human.
That seems true if what you're implying is that it's human nature to cheat on contracts, renege on promises, and free-ride whenever possible. I concede that humans have those streaks, but I don't accept them.
As for the arc of technological improvement: it speaks very poorly of any YC company's ability to protect its customer data, too. Or of any HN reader's ability to retain control of their laptop. How do you feel about that?
