View Single Post
Old 09-16-2008, 12:10 AM   #7
Dyslermergerb

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
510
Senior Member
Default
i really think that the money aspect is not a factor in the big picture at all, i think the key is appreciation of the material that was created.

if i download a song that a record company 'owns' and i love it then i am already compensating or 'giving back' to the artist in a way that is far more important than allowing a few cents per song to trickle down to them. an indy artist might be better served having additional merchandise for their fans to buy rather than relying on a medium that is so easy to pirate. it's a lot harder to pirate a t-shirt than a song these days. many bands, mine included, give their music away for free.

if intellectual property has a monetary value then the record companies should replace our obsolete vinyl records and cassettes with whatever the modern medium is, or at least allow us to do so without squawking. essentially , if you've paid for a song at any time in your life then you bought a de facto license to enjoy that song not just to enjoy that song on a particular medium, so if your cassette gets chewed up and you download an mp3 it's all part of the de facto license.

however the corporate slant is that if your cassette gets chewed up you're screwed and legally have to buy another in order to enjoy the music again, right? who decided that? not any of us, and most likely the majority of artists wouldn't be so greedy as to make a fan pay more than once for the same song.

sorry if the corporate mechanism suffers and ceasar isn't rendered unto, but that's my free will and the general consensus of the modern world is that music, once exposed to the public, becomes part of the public domain but the artist is basically expected to capitalize on the fame generated by the content.

look at the girls playing mandolin and ukes etc on youtube, they get thousands of fans and are giving you entertainment, for free, and cashing in on the fame without record companies in the middle. it's a whole new system of music, even with rampant mp3 downloading, new talent still emerges and inspires.

the people who suffer are those who refuse to accept that the times have changed and cling to antiquated rules that were the norm 20 yrs ago.

i think our main man dw needs to get a little more creative on his revenue generating rather than clinging to rules that are becoming more plastic. simply selling mp3's and sticking to the 'morals' of old fashioned laws looks like a system that will eventually fail in a monetary way.

i will not pirate the mp3's i purchased from david, but i find myself thinking that it's selfish of us to essentially 'withhold' the information in those mp3's from the public.
hey, i think you are absolutely right. "nine inch nails" is now giving away their new album for free on their website. they are doing this for precisly the same reason you stated above. you can't fight this free exchange of information, you just have to creatively change with it. i went into the virgin records store the other day and do you want to know which album was nearly sold out? it was the "nine inch nails" one. weird, huh? you would think the opposite, right? if they are giving it away for free then nobody is going to buy it, right?

i have also seen new artists uploading their own material to the torrent sites and putting a note inside saying that if you like the music then please make a donation.

i think you are right but that there needs to be a new creative idea to change with the times. at least i-tunes is still bringing in the money. yeah, maybe they have a monopoly on the industry, which is not good, but at least the artists are still receiving pay checks from them.

keep it light,
foo
Dyslermergerb is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:19 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity