Just because you decide to give away your music for free doesn't make you an expert and it doesn't mean that you should be able to make that decision for other

Just because you decide to give away your music for free doesn't make you an expert and it doesn't mean that you should be able to make that decision for other content creators. Simply put, if you don't care about it enough to buy it, then you don't need to have a copy. No copy - no problem. The business model of making something people want is always a good business model. The act of taking things you enjoy from people without paying for them is bad business. It makes continuing to create the content cost prohibitive and ultimately means that you end up with less things you like being made. Not every artist is in a position to tour. If you want a better comparison, this is like a model letting you take pictures of her for an agreed upon fee, you take the photos, give her the negatives but refuse to pay for the copies you keep. You spread the copies around so nobody else has any reason to pay her for them either. Sure, she has her copy, but you've made it difficult for her to make money from them, and you have not paid for something that she created under the premise that it should only be taken if paid for. She certainly didn't lose anything, oh, except time, dignity, and her rights. Sharing or leaking a CD is basically the same as this. I'm sure you'll argue that you would not have paid for the photos, and that taking copies of them is okay. I tend not to like to engage in things that take advantage of other people, no matter how many steps I am removed.