Stringsinger, this sort of crap is wheeled out all the time by those who support free downloading. There may be an element of truth in some genres of music but surely it's less applicable to folk, at least in the UK where it cannot be said to be part of the "recording industry" - it's mostly a mixture of small record labels and self-published albums. Perhaps it's different where you are.

Turning to your questions:
1. Isn't it about money?

Yes. It's about the rights of musicians and record companies (producers have to eat too) who have invested time and money in creating an album and hope to get some of it back. Is that wrong?

2. Who are the thieves? Those who download without paying or those record companies who exploit the artists and pocket the profits?

Certainly those who download without paying. If record companies are exploiting the artists, that's got nothing to do with downloading, unless you're going to make a payment direct to the artist every time you download. Free downloading just deprives the artist of their measly royalty.

3. What about the quality of the music? There was a time when the recording industry wasn't doing so well and people came to live concerts. Recordings were only calling-cards for concerts. As Sol Hurok once said, "If people want to stay away, you can't stop them."

Most of the musicians I know rely on concerts to sell their albums, which are a significant part of the evening's remuneration. We're not talking stadium gigs here.

4. Who does music belong to?
Surely it belongs to the person who creates it

5. Can artists be supported on the basis of their artistic merits and not some dubious
business practices?

What does on earth does this mean? If you want to support an artist you buy their albums and pay to get into their concerts, don't download or sneak in through the back door.

6. Doesn't genuine artistic talent surface anyway because people want to support it in their own way?

Talent may surface, but it still has to eat. Professional artists need to get paid. People supporting them "in their own way" is only any help if it involves passing money to the artist.

7. What about musical imperialism where taste is dictated by the pocketbook and crooked businessmen?
WTF? We're discussing about folk artists here. Who are these fat cats who dictate taste?

Many of the artists who've been discussed on this thread either have a good relationship with their record label or have published the album themselves.   Pretending to be standing up for them against the big bad recording industry bears no relation to reality, and does them no favours.

It's true that some musicians did enter into less than advantageous contracts. In some cases this was due to naivety on both sides, between friends who never expected the rights under the contract to be transferred to others. But ripping off the record company through free downloads doesn't do anything to help the artist.

If you've managed to find a way to give away albums and somehow recoup the money in other ways, I'm sure a lot of people would love to hear about it. Until then, most of them expect to be paid for their work.