I like thesixtyone. I wish we could start over with music and eliminate all non-free music from the world. Sure, there is the one or other old gem I am still attached to (Radiohead for example), but the sacrifice would be worth it.
With all respect to TheSixtyOne, the minds in the world that are making the best music aren't putting their stuff into a social commune. They're aware of how talented they are, and as such they're looking for compensation for their ability.
In all of history, the vast majority of the best art has come to us commercially. There are always exceptions, and it tends to be that the free breeding grounds lead to the next generation's brilliant artists, but people do things for money. To quote a brilliant actor in a film by a gifted director, both of whom were paid substantially: "If you can do something well, never do it for free."
It's more complicated than that. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but the best artists also admit that they are standing on the shoulders of giants. A piece of music that I am not allowed to "use", other than passively consume, is worthless to me - as worthless as watching TV 24/7. It might be entertaining, but in the end I would wish that I had not wasted my time in such a way. In that sense I wish the "closed source art" would not even exist, because at the end of the day it is just a pain in the butt.
Take photography, for example: say there is a really nice building in a street, an architectural marble. Fine - only now I am not allowed to take a photo of my girl-friend in front of the building anymore and put it on the internet, because the architect has the copyright. I'd rather live in a world where I can take a photograph without having to consult a lawyer first. Ultimately the art is interesting to me because of it's meaning, not because of it's commercial value.
I am not at all against artists earning money, but I don't think TheSixtyOne is a piracy site, either.
