The original post talked about this causing a lack of discovery for the new music. If the streamer doesn't pay and just uses non-copyrighted music no harm done to the streamer. It's still great fun. But the users don't get exposed to potentially interesting music content.

Why should the streamer pay for the privilege of being basically an advertisement platform for a commercial product? And they don't, and thus there is less discovery. Hence what is meant by the music industry shooting itself in the foot.

I personally listen mostly to music I listened as a teenager and early 20's. Sometimes I learn of something new and nice from my friends, but otherwise I find discovering new music quite hard.

A new game comes out: Tons of reviews and letsplays and whatnot. Looks interesting, I'll buy. New music comes out: Its advertised maybe in Spotify but that's it. Making a review or analysis is not possible (without paying extra), so I can't encounter it. And thus I won't listen it.

\>Does this also apply to utility bills?

If people could cut costs by using electricity that isn't from their local state monopoly then definitely.

\>Just use non-copyrighted music. If that isn't enough, you need to pay or just live with it.

The original post is complaining about a lack of discovery, and you don't seem to care about finding any sort of solution to the problem originally posed.

No one's going to pay to advertise your crap, thus no one is going to listen to it.