Comments on: File Sharing: Get Over It

By: DarkTwinCities.com » Blog Archive » Teh Scene, MP3s, and Beyond

DarkTwinCities.com » Blog Archive » Teh Scene, MP3s, and Beyond — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 02:42:09 +0000

[...] recently, Christopher wrote a long-little rant on the subject of downloading (etc.). I agreed with many of his points, and the spirit in which it was written. However, I’m not clear [...]

By: Jason NOH

Jason NOH — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:42:00 +0000

The comp.”tape” (yeah, I’m that old haha) works. I don’t have a position on ptp sharing. A new model is bound to somehow split the difference between “pirating” and paying for proprietary mp3s.

Comps though, they were key to the success of a *lot* of bands.

By: rskm1

rskm1 — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:03:55 +0000

Most forms of art are either not-created until someone pays for it, or are created and displayed for free in the hopes that someone likes it enough to BUY it, or commission the artist to create more.

Musicians are rather unique in their sense of “entitlement”, in that they create something for free, and then expect everyone to pay for it before they can hear it.

Clearly, that’s just a crappy paradigm; one need only observe the rampant use of p2p filesharing and the completely ineffectual army of lawyers that the putrid music industry employs with their ill-gotten profits.

So hey, all you brilliant creative right-brain types, why don’t you quit whining about people “stealing your work” and come up with a new friggin’ paradigm???

There are PLENTY of alternate ideas out there; just look around. Ever hear of open-source software? Thousands of programmers developing and debugging code without getting paid for it; so why do they do it and how do they make a living? Start by looking into THAT for inspiration.

Creating music has a lot more in common with creating software than it does with creating furniture. So quit building benches for free and then expecting people to pay before sitting on them, because that’s just STUPID.

By: C

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:42:05 +0000

@rskm1: You had me, and then you lost me with your first analogy…

Michelangelo didn’t get royalties, but he was paid to paint it in the first place. Just sayin’

“The Sistine Chapel ceiling, painted by Michelangelo between 1508 and 1512, at the commission of Pope Julius II, is one of the most renowned artworks of the High Renaissance.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistine_Chapel_ceiling

I mostly agree otherwise.

By: rskm1

rskm1 — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:13:13 +0000

Oh yeah, and I forgot to F DRM too. When I go out and buy an MP3, and then it doesn’t work in my portable device or play on my car stereo because of some ill-conceived “copy protection” scheme, I have to ask myself why I paid extra for INconvenience, and paying it TO the people who are causing it!

By: rskm1

rskm1 — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:05:28 +0000

Michelangelo isn’t getting royalties every time someone looks at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and he damn sure put a lot more time and effort into that than most “artists” put into their albums.

Musicians need to find a way to get paid for their work that doesn’t involve wringing pennies out of everyone BEFORE their song is heard.

Hey, Trent Reznor isn’t living in a cardboard box, and guess why: he’s creative and adaptive.

F the RIAA, F its outmoded business model, and F any “artists” that continue to cling to it despite the fact that record labels are the ones making all the money on CD sales and only throwing them scraps anyway.