Obligatory fuck /u/spez
Glad to know i am not the only whom was arbitrarily perm banned from that shithole.
It makes me chuckle how john Stewart just yesterday was going on about how great and free to use reddit use
I wonder if he’s ever posted or just only ever lurked.
The situation drew attention online after users pointed out the irony of the artist being blocked from sharing content from his own show.
That’s the thing, it isn’t “his.” Nothing a worker creates under capitalism belongs to them. His music is a product, and that product belongs to the corporation that owns the rights. The customer doesn’t own it, either. They’re just paying for the right to attend a concert for one night. Want to see pictures of the show? That’s an additional fee.
This seems to be capitalism’s final form: you will own nothing and be happy. You won’t own your own car, you’ll pay a monthly fee for autonomous driving “ride share” services. You won’t own your own home, you’ll pay a landlord for the privilege of living in their property. You certainly won’t own your own music, movies, video games, books or TV shows. Hell, maybe soon you won’t even own your own dishes or clothes or home furnishings. Water and food probably aren’t too far off, either. Soon they’ll own all the farm land and all the water infrastructure.
I suspect this has nothing to do with the music. The article claims his account only had one other post… this sounds like Reddit’s bot suspending accounts it deems suspicious. Happens to new users all the time, including accounts that lay dormant and suddenly wake up.
This is only catching attention because it’s someone famous. If you’re not famous, the new user Reddit experience in 2026 is atrocious.
While I agree with you (and also hate reddit now) we don’t know if the rights ownership was the reason for removal, or some moderator being edgy, or dropbox link triggering spam filters.
some moderator being edgy,
Mods cannot ban accounts from reddit, only from subreddits. The action taken against the account wqas from the admins.
That’s the thing, it isn’t “his.” Nothing a worker creates under capitalism belongs to them. His music is a product, and that product belongs to the corporation that owns the rights.
Putting your anti-capitalist rant aside for a moment, Paul McCartney does own the rights to his own music. He is in an entirely different negotiating position from some hopeful new artist being offered a record deal.
Paul McCartney does own the rights to his own music
That does put him in a unique and exceptional position, and good for him for that, but clearly he does not have the rights to post images from this particular concert. Or, at least there’s some dispute or confusion about what rights he does or does not have, as it pertains to such media.
Regardless, the general premise remains valid. Exceptions do not invalidate the rule. There is complexity and nuance, absolutely, but, generally, the things that employees create, whether art or something else, are products that do not belong to them. Of course this does not apply to the self employed, obviously, but it does apply to anyone who sells their labor to a firm that they themselves do not own.
