This is a misconception about copyright. "Fair Use" can only go so far as it does not waive the original copyright which is always under protection.
Napster (a music-sharing platform) used the "fair use" argument in defense and failed years ago.
https://sites.udel.edu/cisc356/2014/03/18/fair-use-in-the-digital-age-the-napster-case/
More detail on this issue can be found here:
https://copyrightalliance.org/faqs/what-is-fair-use/
Two critical criteria influencing the judgment on "fair use" are the amount of work used and the effect of the use on the market. Sharing a whole album or a complete song definitely has an effect on the market--potential paid purchase is likely deferred or avoided due to the availability of public shared copy for "criticizing" or "commenting".
On the other hand, if you only share 30 seconds of a few tracks from a single album, it might entitle you under the "fair use" umbrella. However, if the original copyright owner demands removal, you should still comply even though it qualifies for "fair use".
Legally, to share music publically on the Internet, you need to work with a music licensing bureau like ASCAP, BMI, SoundExchange. You also need to comply with DMCA laws. A few platforms do this to be compliant with tight restrictions (no rewind during playback, no more than 4 songs from the same album or artist, the number of plays per person during a given time period). Those platforms usually use advertisement revenue to offset the copyright license fee.
Additionally, 喜馬拉雅 recently published a new version specifically for out-of-China users. You will be surprised to see how much content was removed from the out-of-country only version. Why?
