An editorial in the Toronto Globe and Mail captures some of what I have been struggling with with regards to online music.

...[I]n this tug-of-war between file-sharers and music companies, artists actually find themselves identifying with both sides. We are rights-owners after all, and therefore not at all keen on encouraging loose respect for the rules. But we are also major users of other people's work; our own depends on it. For this reason, we worry about things like the health of the public domain, and trends that seem to be making access to the cultural expressions of the past more difficult and ever more costly.

File-sharing may be piracy, but it is also a consumer revolt and an explicit demand for change. People want more choice and flexibility in the way they "consume" music, which is to say, for example, they want access to single songs and permission to compile their own CDs. This is not an unreasonable request...

On the one hand, I'm a musician who would rather like to be compensated for my efforts. On the other hand, I'm a fan who would like the flexibility and choice. The RIAA's hamhanded efforts have hurt their cause far in excess of their victories. I'm not to the point where I would want to go off the deep end, but I can understand that point of view.