I wouldn't have such a problem with Napster et al, if they had more controls and protection built in (somehow) to handle all these issues, but as it is, it seems to be a free-for-all and likely to be used "legitimately" by only a small percentage of people.

The issue is not even as straightforward as being okay for artists who put their stuff on the net for free, or for public domain stuff. As an artist on mp3.com, my songs are available for free download, but if it is downloaded from mp3.com I get paid something, if it is distributed freely in other ways (other than buying the CD), I don't receive any payment. A lot of our band's material is traditional and therefore public domain, however our recording of us performing our own arrangement of a traditional song is copyright, i.e. we don't own the copyright to the song, but we do own the copyright to our recording, and unauthorised duplication or distribution of our recording is illegal.

I can see both sides of the argument so I find it hard to be strongly for or against. I don't agree with those who argue that it is "good promotion" (implying that artists should give their work away for free and be grateful anyone listens to it!)