They're not a beggar. You're violating their patent (copyright in the case of music). They have the right to stop you because you have no right to copy their product. It's the same as stealing. Is that so confusing? Just as a point of information, do your feelings on this extend to the unauthorized reposting of source articles on FreeRepublic, which some claim derives the originator of advertising income? Or is that a separate situation altogether?
That's not exactly a perfect analogy, but I'll run with it. Under the copyright law, a fair use claim can be made if the use of a copyrighted work is reproduced for the purpose of education or discussion. Free Republic would seem to meet that criteria. However, fair use is also limited to excerpts. Sometimes excerpts are posted on FR and sometimes entire articles are.
As you're probably aware, FR was sued and came to an agreement with two major publishers and agreed not to allow full reproduction of their work. Other copyright owners could do the same. The law and the courts worked properly in this example. Music copyright holders should also be allowed to enforce their copyrights.