I agree with Merlin -- what's important here is that one of the music industry's defenders has turned his coat publicly.

So what? What is that supposed to mean to anyone but him? Ooooh... someone else got fed up and left the party. So what, there are still millions of folk out there dancing and drinking punch, and suckers are still being born every minute. Is the recording industry suposed to care that much about some minor malcontent? Hell, they didn't seem to care when Prince was badmouthing them on the Tonight Show ten years or so ago, but they're supposed to listen when some guy I'd never heard of before today posts a half-assed rant (that can't even bother to flesh out a proper logical argument) to his website?

And if this guy can't even win someone like me, who agrees with him on a number of points, over with this piece, then does he think he's got a shot at even fazing a "nonbeliever"?

He's telling them that he's happy to pay for music, but is no longer even willing -- let alone happy -- to pay a music industry that takes advantage of everyone and doesn't give anything useful back anymore.

Except for all that useless music...

Note the questions along the lines of "Artist X is fantastic; why didn't you tell me they existed?"

That's not their job. Their position is not to tell every soul out there about every band out there that they may or may not like. Their job is to advance the money to get records made, and then in turn try to sell as many records as they can to make a profit. Alerting the public to new/different/related bands is left up to third parties -- resellers like Amazon or Insound, or publications like The Big Takeover. Yes, it is in the interests of the recording industry to do some advertising and pushing, but not for every two-bit band in the world, regardless of how beloved they may be to some folk...

"Why don't you help me explore new areas of musical taste instead of punishing me for it?"

Again, I'm not so sure that's their job -- and I really doubt there's enough ROI for them to do so. If you want to expand into new musical areas, there are probably 2000 usenet groups out there for you to look at and ask questions in, there are plenty of magazines that will help you out, there are plenty of websites out there where artists make some of their work available for you to sample for free.

And how exactly is someone being punished for exploring new areas of musical taste?

And are you just as angry with the publishing industry for not supplying you with a weekly list of books and authors you might like? Or at the food industry for not telling you about that great Moroccan restaurant across town? Or at the wine industry for not sending you an email telling you all about the latest offerings from Bugknuckle Vineyards?

Look, the recording industry catches a lot of well deserved heat on a lot of topics. Their business model is stale and crufty. In a lot of ways they do wrong by their artists. They are too worried about getting the government to protect them, and not worried enough about innovating their way out of the state they're in. They are making mistakes with things like their copy protection schemes, and so on. But they do catch their fair share of unfair crap as well. And stuff like the crying jag in question do nothing to change any of that.

Merlin talked about there being a bigger truth in the article, but the only bigger truth I see is that there is yet one more person out there who is unwilling to put his money where his mouth is and actually do something to fix the perceived problem. If there is really this vast sea of people out there ready to throw their money at a content provider who is doing the "right thing", then by all means, put away the keyboard, wipe off those tears, do something useful[1], and get in on this cash cow. Lead by example. Actually demonstrate that your model is even feasible, if not overwhelmingly successful. Sam Walton did it, Steve Jobs did it, Frank Maguire and Fred Smith did it. But by all means shut the living hell up until you actually do something.

Essentially, my bottom line is, if you want to see a record label that treats its artists fairly, start one. If you want to see a record label that permits free sharing of the works in its catalog, start one. If you want to see a record label that takes advantage of the internet for distribution, start one. If you want to see a record label that charges "fair prices" for their products, start one. If you want to see a record label that seeks out and promotes obscure bands to the tens of people that care, start one. If you want to see a record label that surrenders copyright after 5 or 10 years, start one (good luck getting the artists to agree to that one, though). If you want to see a record label that fixes any of the things that you think are wrong with the industry today, for the love of god and all her wacky nephews, start one.

I think you can see where I'm going with this...

[1] And no, writing yet another article full of points that have been made 1000 times before, and which won't be read by your nominal targets anyway, is most certainly not useful.