I don't think Altus or anyone else is suggesting that artists do not have the right to release their works in any way they see fit.
The point is that are real costs that result from limiting people's access to your work via limited editions or by choosing to not make your work available digitally via legal channels.
One such cost is that the fans who want to support the work are denied the opportunity to do so. In another thread in this forum, Mike Griffin mentioned that there were a number of artists and labels who have wondered why they should continue to do what they are doing given some of the low returns on their efforts. And my sense was that everyone here appreciated the fact that one benefit of buying music--beyond the obvious--is that doing so creates a sense of community. Buying music not only enables me to enjoy music that I like, but it helps me feel that I'm supporting an artistic community. It is a niche community, for sure, but an important one in my view.
When fans are denied the opportunity to support the artists they appreciate, it undermines that sense of community.
To be clear, it is not the artist's responsibility to regulate my feelings, cater to my listening needs, or expend energy ensuring that they release their work in the exact format I desire. But if artists deliberately choose to limit the number of people who can support their work, they should be aware that such choices have the potential to alienate and limit their fan base. If the fan base is expendable or irrelevant for the solipsistic artist, then no big deal. But I'm not aware of anyone in this community who laments the fact that they have too many listeners.
