To play the devil's advocate in favor of mikeknoop's comment: The claim is (a - n) + b < a : n > 0 a: record sales (a-n): record sales minus would-be sales d

To play the devil's advocate in favor of mikeknoop's comment: The claim is (a - n) + b < a : n > 0 a: record sales (a-n): record sales minus would-be sales due to spotify b: additional profit spotify generates from would-be piraters The fallacy (IMO) of the label is that "a-n + b" is in all situations less than "a". They're deciding that it's less profitable to distribute content with spotify without examining what "b" is. You may very well be right that a spotify-license system is less profitable. I think it's jumping to conclusions to decide this, though. "b" (the profit generated from would-be piraters) is a study-able quantity, and should be measured before making any claim.