Amazon.com Widgets
  • More people will listen

    More people will listen to music if it is free. Artist already make enough money so they don't need to sell it on devices. Artist would be more popular as well. If people can listen to it for free on the radio or YouTube then why can't they any other time?

  • Music is Sold For a Reason

    I can see where people would think that it being free would be good, but is it honestly? Artists have to pour money out of their pockets to make music, and if they're not getting paid anything then they have to pay to do what they love. Sure things like sports have to be paid for and people may love doing those, but think of all of the hours and other money they have to spend to be good enough to produce music. They need money to feed their family, and if they don't have that then they're kind of screwed.

  • Yes, Music should be free.

    Music should be free because some people can not afford to buy and listen to it. If it is free on YouTube or the radio the why not make it free all the time. Artist are making enough money as it is so they can make it free and it wont effect them. I think that music should be free.

  • Passion over money

    A true musician produces music because they love it, not because they're hoping to make money off of it. I stongly feel that music should be free because, as an artist myself, I believe that it is more of a beautiful hobby than a career. And also, as a socialist, I believe free music could easily be plausible in a socialist society.

  • Music SHOULD be free

    People out there don't the money or the experience in order to buy or find a website to find free music. I understand the artists don't make enough money, but can't they make money another way? I mean if they are really a good artist, they would have sold out concerts. But if they don't, they don't deserve to be an artist. Music is meant for people to enjoy, not to punish people so that they can't buy the music they love. You know, poor people need music too!

  • It's not being greedy.

    Musicians make money from royalties, advances, playing live, selling merchandise, and licensing fees for their music. If music is free, the only downfall would be them living slightly less luxuriously. We would be saving tons of money ourselves. Just think about it. Four hundred songs bought from iTunes is over $400 spent. I understand that they've put a lot of effort into their work, so there should be an option to instead pay for the song/album as a donation. And for those who say "making music free means music is worthless" think of it this way. Are hugs from your mother or kisses from a partner free? Yes. Are they worthless? Far from it.

  • It's only fair.

    A man or woman working in an office or on an assembly line only gets paid once for their efforts, so why should a musician or actor or a publishing company get paid for decades for work they did years ago? It is time copyright laws are made more fair for the average person.

  • Most Modern Music Artists Are Very Greedy And Very Rich, Good Music Should Be Free

    Again most modern music artists are rich and swimming in boatloads money. Most are corrupt and in it just for the money and fame. Concerts generate lots of money and should be more often in smaller towns of fans. Most kids think downloading music is "free" so they download it and get their parents in trouble and lose access to the internet.

  • Yes, music should be free

    Music should be free, but only after a certain amount of time. It should not be available for download until the album has been out for at least six months to a year. We listen to songs on the radio and MTV. There is also YouTube, and the music channel. They are all free. I know artists depend on money from an album, but look at how much money they make from a concert? Don't be greedy!

  • Theres Better and more Awesome way to Support Artists

    Firstly, major record labels are greedy and manipulative corporations who in most cases stifle creativity, but thats besides the point. Most artists, even pop stars, make most of their money off touring, so it's actually better to support artists in this way, both because you can easily get tons of music free online and because seeing a musician live is exponentially better experience than just listening to them. Also think of all the great dead musicians! I don't mind buying an indie band's album here and there to support them, but I don't like the idea of families and record labels getting my money and not the artist.

  • No it should not

    Although it would be nice to have music for free it is not fair for the artists who are putting all their time and effort into creating it for us to not get compensated for their work. I mean if music were free then how will the musicians put food on their table?

  • Current Music Needs Support.

    I know bands can make money through tours and music videos, but making music free is not fair to them. What about struggling musicians that are trying to get started without a label to produce their music? Expecting them to make their music without financial support is something they cannot consider.

  • For the love of music

    Artists do make money from live shows and merchandise, but they are bi-products of the music itself. If music is free then people would not be making music for the love of music. Musicians are not the greedy ones it is you, the consumer that is greedily stealing what another person has poured there heart and soul into.

  • It Shouldn't Be Free

    Music should not be free. Artists and record labels spend a lot of time and money creating music.Millions of dollars go into making an album, sometimes even one song. Due to this, music should not be free at all. Those people deserve to be compensated for their time and effort of making the music.

  • No way roflol

    Music isn't even expensive. I feel good knowing I own all my music. It doesn't matter if an artist is super rich. It's hilarious how people want to lessen others success. Just because an artist is rich doesn't mean they're always going to be. It's an incredibly unpredictable atmosphere. You could write a hit and then die out. Big deal 1 million people bought one ban or artists material for a dollar or ten dollars. I mean.... It's just like they're rich and I'm now giving them 99 cents or 1.29??!?! How idiotic.... If music was $1000 a song id understand, but you can get epic songs and albums that are masterpieces for pennies already... I am poor as hell but you know music is worth a lot more than 99 cents to me... So I freakin pay for it. Apparently "most artists make more off of selling t shirts".. Why not just be a t shirt sales person hahaha!!! That's hilarious.

  • Music Should NOT Be Free

    You'll go out and buy a coffee for like £2 when you can just make it at home, for free, but you wont spend that much on music, because you can download it for free. Coffee is something that only lasts a short amount of time. Whereas you can listen to music over and over, whenever and wherever you want. Yet, you'd still rather pay for a coffee and not music.

  • Artists own songs, let them get credit

    No because the Artists wrote the song and took like idk how many days to write that so yeah . They did all this for nothing and get no Money in it ? They should because they own the song . So stop whining and just get over it and pay for your favorite song , I bet you'll enjoy it

  • Music Should NOT Be Free

    The artists make their songs to make money, making and selling music is a job, not a hobby. Artists put there time, effort, and money into their songs. If their songs were for free there would be absolutely no reason in making music other than just for fun. For some people, music depicts the meaning of life, or religion, or anything else it could mean in one person's perspective. So music should not be free.

  • Music (other than free give away by the musician themselves) should NOT be free

    Just because I like Ferrari and the fact I can't afford it doesn't mean that I'm allowed to steal it. Just because it's so easy to get free music nowadays with the current technology, it doesn't make downloading illegal mp3 on some website the right thing to do. It is still WRONG thing to do.

  • Music is not an entitlement.

    Most musicians are not the super rich (or super in debt, sold their souls to record labels) people that we hear about in Rolling Stone and Entertainment Tonight. There is a large middle class of musicians who work hard to support themselves and their family with their music. Why should their hard work and practice be handed to the masses with no compensation? Is it greedy to want to feed your family? Why should one profession be fairly compensated and another not? Aren't we all free to be able to make money to provide for the things we want? Musicians put in YEARS of hard work and practice developing their talents to be able to put out a quality product, no different than an engineer or doctor doing years of schooling. Musicians deserve to be rewarded for their hard work so that they will be able to continue to put out music you like. It's selfish and an entitlement mentality to think that you deserve the result of another persons hard work without any compensation. Art is not free for consumption unless you make it yourself, you are not entitled to the result of years of hard work, practice, research, and diligence of another person. Musicians do it because they love it, but if they can't pay their bills they can't continue to make music.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.