Dear Sirs, hold your horses. There are notable definitions and references we may lean against here :) Commmmodity: "In economics, a commodity is a

Dear Sirs, hold your horses. There are notable definitions and references we may lean against here :) Commmmodity: "In economics, a commodity is an economic good, usually a resource, that has full or substantial fungibility: that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them."[0] Note here that the essence is not about preferences ("indifference"), but "equivalence" only (ie. "fit for purpose"): Fungibility: "In economics, fungibility is the property of a good or a commodity whose individual units are essentially interchangeable, and each of whose parts are indistinguishable from any other part" [1] - and "Fungibility refers only to the equivalence and indistinguishability of each unit of a commodity with other units of the same commodity, and not to the exchange of one commodity for another." So: Both sides can be right! Music _is_ a commodity when one item (a song) is _perceived_ so similar to another item that their value _in_the_given_context_ is _perceived_ as equal by a consumer (the case for one poster below). If a consumer assigns equal value (not preference, value) to Song A and Song B then these two are commodities because they are _interchangeable_ in some context. Both are "fit for purpose" On the other hand, if the consumer does not want to replace Artist A with Band B then these are not interchangeable, and as they are not interchangeable they are not commodities either (the case of another poster below). So, the customer is always right. Ie, commodity or not is a matter of context. I hope this helps.