It is widely accepted that quite a lot of applications on the Internet, especially the software on which the Web 2.0 platforms perform, cause the transaction costs to diminish. It is also claimed that diminishing transaction costs help the Web 2.0 platforms provide their services for free. In this paper, we challenge this argument. We claim that there is no causation between the diminishing transaction costs and the free supply of Web 2.0 services. We argue that a new economy of exploitation, which we call Commodification 2.0, favours giant internet corporations in such a way that they appropriate the value that online users collaboratively produce. The goods and services that are made available to online users for “free” generate incomes from two sources: (1) subscriptions sold to paid users and (2) the advertisements provided by several companies that exploit the data and other forms of information about the tastes and preferences of the users to market their products online. Focusing our attention on Spotify, we show that online users help this Web 2.0 platform run a huge mechanism of surplus production where the producers of value (in this case: music artists) are either underpaid or not paid at all. Also, non-paying users are not paid for supplying the datasets. The main source of income are the fees paid by the Premium users. Non-paying users, who sign up at Spotify’s website to listen to music for free, provide Spotify with sophisticated datasets about their tastes of music and other intellectual preferences. Spotify stores the datasets and sells them to various companies that seek opportunities to advertise their products on the Internet. Spotify, an Internet company that once aimed at combatting copyright infringement in the music industry, now turns into a machinery of exploitation.