Making music for money

By Mike Luchia

Editor, the Gauntlet,


Re: "The crime of the masses," Mar. 25, 2004,


Being a music lover, and a frequent Kazaa user, I was stunned to see Myke Atkinson’s warped views on Internet music sharing in his opinion column last week. In the start of his column, Atkinson got a few things right; namely the importance of music in our lives and the impact it can have on us. Then he boldly stated that loving music demands we pay multinational corporations big bucks for it.


Huh? How on earth did the importance of music get confused with the "importance" of money?


The capitalist brainwashing and ignorance in the article are an insult to everything music is about. Music is an art form and, like all forms of art, it is a method of expression. Musicians who truly love expressing themselves via music should not care if people download their music for free. If this means they will only receive several hundred thousand dollars as opposed to several million dollars for doing what they love to do, then I see no harm in it.


On the other hand, musicians who are in the business strictly for profit (i.e. corporate rockers such as Metallica and Kid Rock) are the ones who have tainted the business and are the ones who are least deserving of our money. Yet, they are also the ones who fight most ferociously against Internet music sharing.


I believe Internet music sharing can actually lead to the proliferation of lesser-known bands, it certainly has for me. Music is for everyone, and if an artist is in it for the money they should pack up and head to Wall Street.