I’ve noticed some editors (and some tools/userscripts) add the “stream for free” type for Bandcamp URLs. Does that type make sense for them? I know you can technically preview full songs on most albums but it’s definitely not for traditional streaming usage and you will eventually get cut off if you do this too much on an album page. Streaming through their app is only for albums you own IIRC.
2 Likes
You can still stream it for free, so yes 
4 Likes
You can also stream other albums in the app, just like on the website.
while an artist or label can put limits in place (how many free streams, which tracks are free to stream, etc.), I think for any fully or mostly streamable album, the Stream for free type belongs
that said, I know the Bandcamp importer doesn’t add this relationship if there’s hidden tracks
I really don’t like the “stream for free” relationship tbh. When it’s applied to a Bandcamp album page it’s inaccurate because of the limits you mention, when it’s applied to a Spotify link it’s inaccurate because you just pay with the time they want you to listen to ads instead of money, etc.
I think we should just have “download at” and “stream at” relationships.
2 Likes
I think simplifying these relationships could be a good idea, but I still think having a way to denote if something is free or not is still good, perhaps even adding “free with ads” or “free, but you have to give an email address” options, if we really want that (the latter could have better wording tho…)
Anyone who has used the internet, or gone into a shop and gotten something for ‘free’, knows only too well there will be strings attached. Do we need to spell out every possible permutation of what strings might be attached for everyone? The string is long enough as it is, thanks 
2 Likes