The paradox with music sharing is that it can *benefit* artists. Particularly artists who don't get much mainstream radio play. Let's say someone recommends a song that I've never heard and never will get to hear on radio. if I download it and really like it, I usually end up buying the album. I'm not going to buy music blind, without ever having heard it. It'd be like buying a car without first test driving it. If the song is turd, I trash it after a few listens - and yeah in that case the artist benefits sweet FA.
I realise downloading is wrong, but just like "tape to tape" didn't kill music, on-line downloading and music sharing isn't going to either.
Let me make another example for the sake of illustration. I got into the Smiths because someone made me a tape. That was simply wrong of them, wasn't it? The 1980's equivalent of sharing music on the net. Now some 20 years later I own (quickly exports iTunes to excel) 34 Morrissey albums, EP's and singles. Plus a few DVD's, not to mention all my Smiths CD's and singles, plus the vinyl and vhs that I once owned and have since thrown away. Plus the shirts, plus plus plus. If I lived elsewhere in the world, it would be a whole bunch of concert tickets too. All because someone made me an illegal copy of a Smiths album.
Maybe Morrissey gets airplay in the UK, but where I live neither the Smiths nor Moz gets played on radio. If I share a Morrissey song with a friend, there's every chance that they'll get tuned into his music and end up being a rabid fan like the rest of us. One or two downloads can convert into many, many album sales.
Like I said, I know it's not right, but I am pointing out that there's two sides to the coin. I can say just about all of the CD's I've bought over the last five years have been because I've picked up a song I really like through music sharing.
Out.