I'm pretty sure my Tidal subscription started in February 2016 when Kanye West dropped Life of Pablo and shared with his fans that it would only be available on Tidal. Looking for a way to secure good audio quality, unnecessary pop-up windows when trying to download the tape, I found myself locked into a Tidal subscription and sharing the password with friends to also listen. A few weeks later the album was available for free streaming on Apple Music and Spotify... I wasn't fazed, but according to The Hollywood Reporter, Justin Baker-Rhett was. 

The publication reports that Justin has gotten the green light to move forward with his case suing Kanye West and Tidal's owner Aspiro for fraudulent inducement. In 2016 Kanye tweeted that his album "will never never never be on Apple. And it will never be for sale.... You can only get it on Tidal." This tweet is what made Justin pay up $9.99 for a Tidal subscription and he's still upset about it. 

Justin's lawyers will have a heavy defence team try and shut their move down, but the publication has gotten its hands on some of the questions that will be asked. 

"Was the at-issue Tweet false at the time it was made? Did the post-release changes West made to The Life of Pablo render the widely released album different, such that the album’s eventual release rendered West’s statements immaterial? What was Mr. West’s intent when he told the world that The Life of Pablo would only ever be available on Tidal? Was it reasonable to rely on that representation? Can Aspiro be held liable for West’s statements?"

U.S. District Court Gregory Woods released a statement on the case, siding with Kanye just a little:

"After all, Mr. West tweeted that 'My album will never never never be on Apple. And it will never be for sale' (emphasis added). He did not commit that a particular version, or mix, or master of his album would not be on Apple—his commitment was that the 'album,' 'it,' would not be. And the album was made available on Apple Music shortly after the Tweet. Regardless of whether or not Mr. West’s argument will persuade a jury at a later stage in the case, the Court has little difficulty concluding that the complaint plausibly pleads that Mr. West’s statement that his album would never never never be available on Apple Music or for sale was false."

What do you guys think?