Trust me lol, if you were a music artist or a movie star, you would have more than enough money even with peaple pirating your work, im sorry but having a choice between putting a few cents into someones wallet ( which is really how much they make per person buying a song from them, or saving myself alot more money, I wouldnt feel guilty at all about listening or watching pirated material. The artists only make a small percentage of what you pay, and most peaple dont even know about some artists until they hear one of thier songs on youtube or something. Its advertising in a sense, and alot of peaple wouldnt be jack squat without it. For this reason alone, alot of artists auctually upload thier own content for free for this very purpose, to gain popularity and benefit from more profit in the long run.
First of all, let's just be clear that if a artist himself upload a soundtrack of himself he obv. wants it to be there, so then there's no problem at all - that's not even what this discussion was about.
When I say the word
artist I believe the first that flash in-front of your eyes are somthing along with Britney Spears, Coldplay, Skrillex etc. - in other words; the
big ones, then think about that of all artists or performers out there, maybe just <5 % (not too sure about these numbers, don't quote me on this, but you get the point) can actually make a living of their music, and even less can make a
good living. So don't think that every musician is rich as fawk.
Here's a story: John is a guy who's good at singing and playing guitar, after YEARS of practice he finally got a record-deal, the record-company gets 80 % and John's manager gets 5 %, that leaves John with 15 % of all his earnings. Then ofc. somebody buys his track and puts all of his songs up on Youtube, many other ppl DL it from there and re-uploads it. No-one's gonna buy a single record from John when they can just DL it online for free, and yes I admit it's good advertisement, but if John wanted his songs to reach out for free to everyone he would've just uploaded the songs himself, wouldn't he? Another option for John if he wanted many ppl to listen to his songs would be using Spotify or Vevo on Youtube.
Would you rather sell 1000 songs, or give away a few thousand for free and end up selling a million songs due to peaple listening to your work and sharing it with others?
In the long run this is probably the best, but who are we, the consumers of his/her music to decide? Shouldn't that be the artists' choice?