It is not really as simple as downloading someone's music for free being equal to stealing. The vast majority of illegal downloads are people downloading music that they would never otherwise buy just because they can. But, again, if they didn't have the option to download, they would not buy it.
The problem is that, of course, once people download an album they actually like, there is no incentive to buy it because they already have it. However, that accounts for a very small percentage of illegal downloads - if what you could afford to buy if there was no internet was 5 albums a month, and you are downloading 100 (most of which you never even really listen to), it is not as if you have stolen the other 95 albums (which, again, you may not have even listened to). But you don't know which 5 albums of those 100 you would have bought a priori and just as downloading music for free is unfair to the artists, it was unfair to people when back in the days you would buy an album without knowing whether it is good or not and it would turn out to be garbage with 2 or 3 good tracks out of 20.
San Quinn's albums from the last half a decade are firmly in the category of albums one would never bu, BTW, simply because of how much they suck
What is needed is a system that rewards music quality and shifts the transfer of money from listeners to artists from the point of acquiring the music (whether is is physical CD or digitial MP3) to the process of listening to music. It could be done in principle but it would require dismantling the whole industry as it currently exists, so it is not going to happen any time soon.
But then I will admit that I have passed up on buying a few albums that I normally would have purchased(because I like the artists) because a download was available....but 80% of the music I download, I would have never purchased...People rather spend their money on other things these days...
if the money you put into your project doesnt produce a viable source of income then i would suggest finding another job to feed the childrens. artists kids aint the consumers responsibility. if a starving artist has starving kids then they need to find another lane.
on a side note, i give Quinn credit for demonizing illegal downloading even if its a KKK album. unlike ol' dude demonizing major signees with a 360 deal.
