Why Isn't Chris Brown's Album Being Boycotted?

My first quick bonus blog between more substantive posts.

Amidst the fury over the NFL's handling of domestic (and child) abuse, the R&B singer Chris Brown launched a new album today. What's the relationship between the two?

Brown is a convicted domestic abuser (who served jail time for violating his parole by getting into a brawl). Which prompted me to wonder— why does he still have a record deal with RCA? And why aren't people calling for a boycott of his album?

Part of the societal problem which has prompted the NFL situation has been caused by a consistent lack of willingness to punish domestic abusers significantly— both in court and out of court.  

If we think that Ray Rice ought to lose a substantial portion of his potential career (which for an NFL running back is quite short) or more (which he should), then why does Chris Brown have the opportunity to make millions selling R&B albums?

I'm a believer in redemption. I'm not saying that Brown should never again be able to ply his trade. But he should have lost his record deal for a few years. 

If we want to reduce domestic violence, the best way to do it is to build a culture in which its simply unacceptable— stiff penalties for all domestic abusers, from celebrities down to John Q. Public, cultural scorn, loss of economic opportunity, etc. 

Forcing the NFL to clean up its act is a start, but domestic abuse is not just an NFL problem, and it seems totally incongruous for anyone upset with the NFL to give one nickel to Chris Brown or RCA.