>People eat McDonald's a million times and they still go back
>to pay for it. You'll probably say that maybe they actually
>LIKE McDonald's so it's not shitty to them, but the fact is
>that if they found a way to get McDonald's for free, they
>would suddenly say it sucks and they don't have to pay for
>it.

Im not going to argue with you on that, if it's free and it has no "spiritual / moral" value attached to it then people won't buy it. If a musician don't have a solid fanbase (people who will support you) then he has to find something else to make his product attractive. What ? I don't know, I haven't thought about it. If one can't do any of those things then Im sorry he has no choice but releasing music for free until he figure out how to sell it ... I agree it shouldn't be like that and I don't think the artist HAS to give his music for free, but what would he do instead ?

>The problem here is that the whole "I sample the music to see
>if I like it or not and if it sucks then I don't buy" thing is
>a LIE. Because people still don't buy the music they DO like.
>Let's just be real here: people don't wanna pay for music,
>period. That's a reality.

I agree there are a lot of people that won't pay for music, but most music lovers will pay if it's good.


>My problem is with araQual acting like musicians are assholes
>for wanting to recoup the investment they put into creating
>the album that you downloaded for free and claim that you
>LIKE, and saying shit like "when are they gonna grow up?"
>
>That really offends me.

I understand your point but like every other business, sometimes you start something and it sinks before you have the time to recoup the money that you invested.