The truth, as with many things, probably falls somewhere between the author's stance and yours. The rise of "free" simply represents a new dynamic in the market

The truth, as with many things, probably falls somewhere between the author's stance and yours. The rise of "free" simply represents a new dynamic in the market for artistic works. To be fair, it is a dynamic that places downward pressure on prices, and that's not necessarily great for most artists. But it's a dynamic that the market has created and is absorbing, and so artists must come to terms with it. As an artist, you now have to think very carefully about how to price your work. If you believe your work is of exceptional quality, then by all means, price above the market. Likewise, if you believe your work appeals very specifically to a segment that's willing to pay X price, then go with X price and target that niche. If, on the other hand, your work is fairly generic, of average quality, or generally nothing special to any special groups of people, then making a living as an artist is going to be tough for you. Your choices are to price it to market (which may be $0), or differentiate substantially (enough to bear a nonzero price). Practically speaking, moral arguments on either side are somewhat irrelevant. Instead, what matters is the artist's positioning relative to everyone else. Today, more than ever, you'll have to make yourself special -- or specialized -- if you want to earn a decent living.