Billy Corgan - No Money In Music Now
Old 20th March 2012
  #1261
Gear maniac
 
brightshine's Avatar
 

If some do not think that a musician/recording artist/someone trying to make a living with music has a right to be paid, you really have to be kidding yourselves.

Personalize the issue. Let someone steal your source of money from you. I guess you have no right to stop them? I might be missing something in this ongoing debate, but it seems rather simple to me. If an individual decides he wants to be paid, pay him. If someone wants to give their music/art away? Let them.

Again, what if I can come up with a way to "steal" your source of income? What would you do? How about everyone answering that question?
Old 20th March 2012
  #1262
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
That face palm takes on another meaning when you go back and read his statement and actually understand it.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1263
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post

Musicians have the same rights as any other worker when it comes to being paid when they work.
There is a general human right to be free to determine your own future. This is agreed by many in society. You can't choose to sell your product when people take it from you illegally. Your freedom to determine your future is decided by the pirate.

You seem to be agreeing with some others that because playing music for a living is a desirable career, and it's sometimes good fun, people who play music for a living don't deserve the same rights as auto workers.
Wrong!
Nope. That's wrong thinking. Or incomplete thinking. Nobody has any right to be paid because they worked. Working has nothing to do with being paid. You can work and work and work and work, but if you don't have an agreement to be paid, a contract with whomever will be doing the paying, a meeting of the minds, you have no right to be paid and will not be paid.

You have to have an in force deal between you and your audience, and no law will provide that if you haven't put it in place. It's the artists responsibility to arrange that contract with the audience. You can't just presuppose it exists and then go ahead and try to enforce it after the fact.

The unauthorized downloaders don't generally come into your home and steal your songs from your hard drive. They gain access once you've released it. If you release it without a deal in place, you're as much responsible for it's going astray as those doing the downloading are.

It's why the stealing an apple or stealing a car analogy falls short.

And it's why this is an education matter and not a criminal one.

If you can remove the qualitative assignment of "It's theft and that's wrong" and start from a point of what the reality is that we are now working from, and proceed from there, you will be miles ahead on your mission.

The reality is they don't for the most part believe what they are doing is wrong. To them, it's probably not much different from finding a coin on the street. "Hey, look, I got lucky. Somebody dropped a quarter".
Old 20th March 2012
  #1264
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brightshine View Post
If some do not think that a musician/recording artist/someone trying to make a living with music has a right to be paid, you really have to be kidding yourselves.

Personalize the issue. Let someone steal your source of money from you. I guess you have no right to stop them? I might be missing something in this ongoing debate, but it seems rather simple to me. If an individual decides he wants to be paid, pay him. If someone wants to give their music/art away? Let them.

Again, what if I can come up with a way to "steal" your source of income? What would you do? How about everyone answering that question?

answered in my response to Chris. You have a right to be paid when you have a deal in place. A factual agreement where minds have met and aligned. That doesn't exist in the relationship between those who create and release music, and those who download it without authorization. This is a key point that needs examining.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1265
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post
Not me. I was responding to the link the OP provided and found that the title of this thread is misleading because B. Corgan (I'm not a fan either but that's not the point here) says a lot of good and positive things in the clip.

Yes but you'd also had the option of NOT buying music which is something that actually happened in the 80s when quality went really downhill. People basically stopped buying music and IMO it's much the same these days.

So you better find a way to provide an experience that can't be easily shared and 'pirated' in your home. Which is PRECISELY what Billy Corgan is saying! The worst thing you can do is to act as a cop and 'punish' people for at least still being interested in music - downloading or not. And that's another thing that Mr. Corgan is saying in the clip.

NOBODY feels sorry for major labels going down. Of course, it's a fact that most non-major label musicians are affected by the sorry way the music business didn't react to technical and cultural changes. But it's also a fact that many non-bond trading and non-bonus collecting workers are affected by the irresponsible actions of a gang of greedy bankers.
Agreed.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1266
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
Nobody has any right to be paid because they worked. Working has nothing to do with being paid. You can work and work and work and work, but if you don't have an agreement to be paid, a contract with whomever will be doing the paying, a meeting of the minds, you have no right to be paid and will not be paid.
Absolutely correct and logical...but then you're off to La La Land once more. Here it is...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
If you can remove the qualitative assignment of "It's theft and that's wrong" and start from a point of what the reality is that we are now working from, and proceed from there, you will be miles ahead on your mission.
There are two realities at play here. The reality of widespread social attitudes and also the reality of legality. Can you explain why you put reality of attitudes above reality of legality? What precedence do you have to put the wishes of the herd above their law? I guess there have been cases of this, but why apply it in this situation? Disobeying the law has less collateral damage than obeying it? Surely you don't always belittle the law in life, you're not writing from a penitentiary I take it. What makes you trivialize the law in this particular case?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
and start from a point of what the reality is that we are now working from
Yes, this way that people think is a reality, I agree. Another reality is that it is illegal, anything different is merely wishful thinking or confusion. You truly are smearing in your mind the line between legal and "what you think," belittling the reality of legaility. My understanding is that this line of thought of yours would certainly fail in a court of law, historically all society's accepted final judge and jury.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
And it's why this is an education matter and not a criminal one.
Yes, it is an educational matter as well. But are you debating if unauthorized downloading of protected computer files that are "for sale only" without paying is a crime? It's my understanding that according to US law, it is. Do you have different information?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
The reality is they don't for the most part believe what they are doing is wrong. To them, it's probably not much different from finding a coin on the street. "Hey, look, I got lucky. Somebody dropped a quarter".
It's illegal. Deal with reality of legality, not reality of attitudes, and start from there. (Work to change the law to fit society if that's what you feel is best, but the foremost reality currently is it's illegality. How does this post of yours not show that you're in denial of the law? I understand what you are trying to say, but the common legal precedence is that laws go before feelings or "should be's" or "what everyone is doing" etc. To correct this, don't deny the law, but work to change it.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1267
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Yes, this way that people think is a reality, I agree. Another reality is that it is illegal, anything different is merely wishful thinking or confusion. You truly are smearing in your mind the line between legal and "what you think," belittling the reality of legaility. This line of thought of yours would certainly fail in a court of law, historically all society's accepted final judge and jury.



Yes, it is an educational matter as well. But do you really want to waste time debating if unauthorized downloading of protected computer files that are "for sale only" without paying is a crime? It's my understanding that according to US law, it is. Do you have different information?




It's illegal. Deal with reality of legality, not reality of attitudes, and start from there. (WWork to change the law to fit society if that's what you feel is best, but the foremost reality currently is it's illegality.

How does this post of yours not show that you're in denial of the law? I understand what you are trying to say, but there is legal precedence that laws go before feelings or "should be's" or "what everyone is doing" etc. To correct this, don't deny the law, but work to change it.
I understand your perspective. It's common and one beaten into every "citizen" from a very early age. But it's not absolute reality.

A law can never supersede the sovereign nature of a human being. Laws exist at the sufferance of human beings. It's not the other way around. They are how the few attempt to control the many, and require ignorance as to actual rights as distinct from "allowed" rights, in order for the illusion to remain intact. Which is why so much time and effort is expended in reinforcing the meme that "nobody is above the law" except for those who are, of course.

Most of the laws people take for granted as having rightful governance over them have in fact almost no real validity in historical perspectives. Went you take the time to look into it, you end up feeling pretty raped by the whole thing.

It's very much tied in with the corrupt enforcement arm of the corrupt money system.

Our courts are no longer common law courts. They work on principles of Admiralty or maritime law, where everything, of course, comes down to money. You are not a human being in the courts that feel they can drag you in front of them, and be dealt with as such. You are a "person", which is basically a corporate style entity with a name attached and which then becomes subject to these commercial courts mascarading as courts working on "laws of the land" principles. Your entry ticket is your birth certificate and the name it "registers" you under, and then your social insurance (security) number linked to name and date of birth etc.

The rabbit hole starts going pretty deep when you start to look into it. But most discussions of "rights" run pretty shallow without stepping up into or down into the more obfuscated levels of information which surreptitiously govern while giving no outward appearance that they even exist.

Reality is in fact pretty fluid and subject to outrageous amounts of manipulation, as so much depends on perception, which is malleable. Ask Hollywood.

Redefinition has made Legal and lawful almost synonymous. Legal is used because it allows for statutory aspects of law to supplant common law, after which any number of "acts" which have no bearing or jurisdiction over human beings can be made to govern "people" as long as they never distinguish the difference between their "legal name" ( the corporate entity with which they are associated per their birth certificate and other artificial connections).

People have no idea that all of these "acts" used to control them have no force over them unless they are confused as to the difference between who they are and who they've been assigned to be.

I don't know about you, but I'm a human being, not an "account". Pretty slick system, unless you're an account.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1268
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid360 View Post
Define "personal freedoms".
The right to a reasonable degree of privacy, for one. People seem to be more than happy to be giving that up, because the Tech-companies have invented the idea that there's some kind of logic in that using e-mail, smart phones etc should entail handing over all your personal info and allowing them to do with it as they will. They have, however, been relatively conscientious (so far) about this info - not handing it out to any ol branch of government every time they ask for it etc. But this is an issue of paramount importance - that is, if you don't just figure the 1984 big brother scenario is inevitable and who cares anyway. But a lot of people find legislation like SOPA problematic - not because of what it will do to illegal file sharing, but because of what else they can do with it.

(enter violins) And all this, in turn, is about who "owns" the internet/what the internet should be etc. The net as we know it was created by the people (the geeky people ;-), in an extraordinary example of community spirit involving the sharing of ideas - through open source code, chat rooms etc. And watching millions of people solving ideas for the greater good of man kind has been an experience of perpetual amazement.

Just one tiny example: In the space of just the last 2-3-4 years it is now possible for me to send my track to another country - say to Chrisso, get him to lay down drums on it (though I'm sure he would rather choke on one of his drum sticks ) and send it back to me - all in the matter of minutes. Not only that, I can teleport myself (for all practical purposes) to his studio through Skype and watch/listen him do it, while tossing ideas back and forth in real time. I mean, Wow! This is technology created by the internet community - AND this is also file sharing, by the way (the violins crescendo as the camera pans across the waving flags of all the worlds countries).

(then key shifts to B flat minor) The internet is now center stage for a massive war of the minds and a war over who controls the internet itself. To me it seems like Crisso and his klan, downplay this aspect when discussing this issue. The problem for me is when the issue of what to do about illegal file sharing becomes simply a question of being forced to choose between copyright and loss of freedom of choice, freedom of privacy and opening a whole can of worms in the process. I guess my point is I don't accept that the premise should be choosing one over the other. With so many smart people, you would think other viable solutions could surface.

Excuse my slightly melodramatic tone, but I hope you get the jist of what I'm saying.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1269
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
The unauthorized downloaders don't generally come into your home and steal your songs from your hard drive. They gain access once you've released it. If you release it without a deal in place, you're as much responsible for it's going astray as those doing the downloading are.

It's why the stealing an apple or stealing a car analogy falls short.
The artist releases it as a CD "for sale only" or as a download for $4. The songs have been legally protected. You are not allowed to trade, resell, give away, etc etc.

That is the "deal in place." That is being violated by the illegal downloaders. At that point it is not the artist's responsibility to protect it from being given away. It's the government's. That's why we pay taxes, for services that we don't perform ourselves like legal protection.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1270
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
I understand your perspective. It's common and one beaten into every "citizen" from a very early age. But it's not absolute reality.

A law can never supersede the sovereign nature of a human being. Laws exist at the sufferance of human beings. It's not the other way around. They are how the few attempt to control the many, and require ignorance as to actual rights as distinct from "allowed" rights, in order for the illusion to remain intact. Which is why so much time and effort is expended in reinforcing the meme that "nobody is above the law" except for those who are, of course.

Most of the laws people take for granted as having rightful governance over them have in fact almost no real validity in historical perspectives. Went you take the time to look into it, you end up feeling pretty raped by the whole thing.

It's very much tied in with the corrupt enforcement arm of the corrupt money system.

Our courts are no longer common law courts. They work on principles of Admiralty or maritime law, where everything, of course, comes down to money. You are not a human being in the courts that feel they can drag you in front of them, and be dealt with as such. You are a "person", which is basically a corporate style entity with a name attached and which then becomes subject to these commercial courts mascarading as courts working on "laws of the land" principles. Your entry ticket is your birth certificate and the name it "registers" you under, and then your social insurance (security) number linked to name and date of birth etc.

The rabbit hole starts going pretty deep when you start to look into it. But most discussions of "rights" run pretty shallow without stepping up into or down into the more obfuscated levels of information which surreptitiously govern while giving no outward appearance that they even exist.

Reality is in fact pretty fluid and subject to outrageous amounts of manipulation, as so much depends on perception, which is malleable. Ask Hollywood.

Redefinition has made Legal and lawful almost synonymous. Legal is used because it allows for statutory aspects of law to supplant common law, after which any number of "acts" which have no bearing or jurisdiction over human beings can be made to govern "people" as long as they never distinguish the difference between their "legal name" ( the corporate entity with which they are associated per their birth certificate and other artificial connections).

People have no idea that all of these "acts" used to control them have no force over them unless they are confused as to the difference between who they are and who they've been assigned to be.

I don't know about you, but I'm a human being, not an "account". Pretty slick system, unless you're an account.
Ok, you have a lot of ideas there. Some may like them, some may not, some may agree with parts others may not. Some art forms require artist's full time dedication to fully come to their deepest fruition and perfection. How will your concepts above help? Or will they? Or should they. How does the above get molded to meet the concerns of artists and art lovers, software makers and software users, etc?
Old 20th March 2012
  #1271
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
The artist releases it as a CD "for sale only" or as a download for $4. The songs have been legally protected. You are not allowed to trade, resell, give away, etc etc.

That is the "deal in place." That is being violated by the illegal downloaders. At that point it is not the artist's responsibility to protect it from being given away. It's the government's. That's why we pay taxes, for services that we don't perform ourselves like legal protection.
Ok. But I don't see how that's working. I think it would be much better if you had a deal in place with those who you're expecting money from.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1272
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Ok, you have a lot of ideas there. Some may like them, some may not, some may agree with parts others may not. Some art forms require artist's full time dedication to fully come to their deepest fruition and perfection. How will your concepts above help? Or will they? Or should they. How does the above get molded to meet the concerns of artists and art lovers, software makers and software users, etc?
well it won't. In fact it's almost useless information, because almost nobody is aware of it, and so everyone just plays along.

But I feel it's good to know, because if you are "proceeding as if" the reality you believe to be in place is factual, and yet there is something completely different going on, which is undermining you and playing you the whole time, then even just noticing it can be empowering. The system is designed to take from you. Not give you something. So if you are having a "being taken from" problem, the last place you can expect redress is from within the system. It takes care of itself, not you.

I'm just saying.... and have been all along. The beginning of a resolution to this problem artists face, is identifying the right problem. And that is the system within which these abuses can flourish.

You have to be at your own helm if you want to navigate these waters, and if you depend on the lackadaisical system to make anything right for you, you're going to be disappointed. It's bought and paid for, and we're not share holders. We're the "tax payers".
Old 20th March 2012
  #1273
Lives for gear
 
relaxo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
Ok. But I don't see how that's working. I think it would be much better if you had a deal in place with those who you're expecting money from.
I think it would be much better if we had a second sun that hung in the northern hemisphere Nov-March while the main one is down south.

What do you suggest for a "deal in place?"
Old 20th March 2012
  #1274
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
I think it would be much better if we had a second sun that hung in the northern hemisphere Nov-March while the main one is down south.
I support this too.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1275
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
I think it would be much better if we had a second sun that hung in the northern hemisphere Nov-March while the main one is down south.

What do you suggest for a "deal in place?"
Major education. connecting with potential audiences and customers proactively. Most people are decent, and will do the right thing when they are more fully informed.

It looks like a sloppy attitude towards artists offerings has developed partly out of the easy, ready access to everything that exists on the internet, and partly because people are so tired of being squeezed from every quarter that they are rebelling to some degree against having to cough up for every little thing. perhaps a bit of a naughty rebellion.

But I think it's quickly and easily remediable, if a mood of cooperation is sought, rather than one of enforcement.

Do casual downloaders even have any idea of the effect it has on artists? Those who purposely steal and profit themselves, are not the ones I'm looking at. They are criminals and knowingly so. The ones I'm looking at are like the cashier I overheard in the supermarket a couple of days ago, chatting with somebody in the checkout lane about what they were doing on the weekend. She said I'll just probably watch some movies. My Kids just download all that stuff all the time, so there's always something to watch.

Sure she could be intimidated into coming down on her kids, but will she then start buying movies? I don't know. I'd think not.

The internet has developed into an anonymous meeting place, largely. people generally look differently upon what they encounter there than they would almost any other place where "product" can be found.

This will take time and lots of communication and energy to change.

It's up to artists to create the expectation of exchange of money for digital product. Because it isn't an "in place deal" as of right now. Maybe on some level of their thinking they know somebody someplace could use some money for their offerings, but the "disconnect" doesn't make for this to be entirely real.

The route of connection instead of enforcement looks like it will work much better.

I see the vast majority of people as decent and caring. Laws bind them hoping to catch the miscreants. I think we have enough of that already.

Artists might hope that enforcement will provide a quicker fix, and as they are hurting, this might be attractive, but I'm pretty sure no solution lies down that road. only more hard feelings.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1276
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by aroundtheworld View Post
I've checked in on this thread periodically, and it has been, as it often comes to on these forums, the chrisso and rack gear/Lives for Fuzz/purple vista/music monk/blue nine/EFF/redvelvetstudios (same person to all these names; each of which has been used for his account on this forum over the years) argumentum ad infinitum show.

With the hope to either lighten the mood and/or lend some perspective to any participants in these discussions, I did a little math using numbers from recent large threads in this forum.

I believe that, as thread length approaches infinity, the chrisso+rack gear/Lives for Fuzz/purple vista/music monk/blue nine/EFF/redvelvetstudios post quotient settles in at about 1 out of 3. There may be some useless, inflammatory, misleading and mischaracterizing posts among those ~33% of replies, but you have to at least tip your hat to their sheer consistency of output volume.
I'm just passionate about artists rights, why shouldn't I be? Some of us do the things because it is the right and ethical thing to do, not because we profit from it.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1277
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
Yeah you're right, people illegally downloading mp3s is equivalent to slavery, human trafficking, genocide, or child labor. That's not offensive at all. Great debating tactic!
the conversation is not about individual downloaders, it's about millionaire and billionaire tech companies ripping off artists for profit and with impunity.

the conversation is about corporate responsibility, not consumer behavior (which six strikes will start to remedy).

ISP Six Strikes Plan Arrives in July - Throttling, Filtering and 'Education' | DSLReports.com, ISP Information

let the screaming begin...
Old 20th March 2012
  #1278
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzschreiner View Post
The reality is they don't for the most part believe what they are doing is wrong. To them, it's probably not much different from finding a coin on the street. "Hey, look, I got lucky. Somebody dropped a quarter".
well, it will be hard to maintain that line of thinking once they start getting notifications from their ISP.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1279
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I'm just passionate about artists rights, why shouldn't I be? Some of us do the things because it is the right and ethical thing to do, not because we profit from it.
That would be far more believable, and your cause would be far more admirable, if you didn't devolve every almost every conversation on the topic into a morass of leading questions and absurd and childish accusations ("IF YOU LOVE PIRACY SO MUCH, WHY DON'T YOU MARRY IT?").

Don't even bother denying it. Examples absolutely abound in this thread and many others. If you want honest debate, then consider mending your ways. If you don't, then I'm sure you'll continue as you will.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1280
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Can't remember 'back peddling'.
Can't remember mentioning 'recording artists' either.
You said "If they work, they have the right to be paid." and I said "A musician doesn't have a "right" to be paid by the audience simply for working hard." and you said "Uuugh. For the 1001 time.... yes we know." So yeah, I don't get where you're coming from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Musicians have the same rights as any other worker when it comes to being paid when they work.
Sure, if you're talking about club owners not paying musicians or something like that. But in the case of records, what you have is a product. The artist doesn't get paid when they work, they get paid when the product is sold. Just like any other speculative business venture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
You seem to be agreeing with some others that because playing music for a living is a desirable career, and it's sometimes good fun, people who play music for a living don't deserve the same rights as auto workers.
Wrong!
If musicians are employed then yes, they will be protected by all of the same rights that protect other workers. The percentage of musicians that are paid a wage or salary though is probably tiny. Most musicians work as independent contractors, selling their service or products to another business or directly to the audience. Therefore they are not in fact protected under the same laws as a wage laborer. The same would be true of an autoworker who starts his own business building cars. If those cars sell, good for him, but he has no inherent right to be paid for that speculative labor. If somebody steals his cars then that's a law enforcement issue, not a labor dispute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Musicians have struggled for decent conditions for at least 100 years.
there are still no unfair dismissal laws, anti-discrimination laws, healthcare benefits.
You don't think average musicians with mortgages, wives and kids aren't under extreme pressure when their band fires them because they don't fit the image any more? No written warning, no probation period, no real excuse.
No other worker puts up with those kind of employment conditions.
I'm not disputing that being a musician is a really hard way to make a living and always has been. But they are certainly not the only ones who work under those conditions. No independent contractors receive those protections. They generally only apply to wage laborers or salaried employees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
On the virtual instrument software I help produce I'm often working for less than minimum wage.
The midi files are a free give away. They take me weeks because I really want to get them right.
If I totted up the hours i spent and calculated how much I should earn on minimum wage, we couldn't sell the product for the price we do.
Of course, when punters pirate the product, I'm not getting paid at all, let alone being paid below minimum wage.
But that's between you and your employer. Not between you and the paying customers or you and the pirates. The pirates are stealing a product from Toontrack. If you get a percentage of sales then they're stealing from you too. But the pirates are not your employer and it isn't a labor dispute!
Old 20th March 2012
  #1281
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by aroundtheworld View Post
That would be far more believable, and your cause would be far more admirable, if you didn't devolve every almost every conversation on the topic into a morass of leading questions and absurd and childish accusations ("IF YOU LOVE PIRACY SO MUCH, WHY DON'T YOU MARRY IT?").

Don't even bother denying it. Examples absolutely abound in this thread and many others. If you want honest debate, then consider mending your ways. If you don't, then I'm sure you'll continue as you will.
to be clear, the conversation is about millionaire and billionaire tech companies ripping off artists for profit and with impunity. I don't support that, and I don't know why anyone who supports artists rights would. it's pretty simple.

regarding honest debate, I'd respectfully ask the same of you (ways mended).
Old 20th March 2012
  #1282
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by axs1 View Post
But yes, guilty as charged. Push comes to shove, I will choose my personal freedoms over my right to make money off of recorded music. Of course, I don't have a say in the matter, and it looks like - yes, I think I see something on the horizon there, wait a minute, yepp - I will have neither.
But this is your Black or White argument with Zero Flexibility... why must the internet be lawless in order to exist? It's a fallacy. It's a false dichotomy.

Theft is not protected by free speech. As yet no one has been able to explain how protecting artists rights online limits free speech.

http://www.copyhype.com/2012/01/copy...actice-part-4/

It's going to be really interesting to see how this builds once the occupy album is released, where the movement goes and who it aligns with. I have a feeling they are going to support rights and labor over the tyranny of tech companies ripping off artists, especially when those artists are using their labor to support a movement for equality.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1283
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by axs1 View Post
The internet is now center stage for a massive war of the minds and a war over who controls the internet itself. To me it seems like Crisso and his klan, downplay this aspect when discussing this issue. The problem for me is when the issue of what to do about illegal file sharing becomes simply a question of being forced to choose between copyright and loss of freedom of choice, freedom of privacy and opening a whole can of worms in the process.
Seriously man, you are beyond naive.
The entertainment industry is a tiny pimple on piracy's bum compared to big tech. As was ably demonstrated during the anti SOPA campaign.
The entertainment industry has no plans to curtail your privacy.
Meanwhile, the tech industries have seemingly succeeded in diverting your attention towards 'evil labels' and away from their own sordid practices.
Your privacy is already hugely compromised by the internet.
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Apple all have embedded software to track your every move geographically, and track your movements on the internet.
If you search for alcohol rehabilitation or abortion clinics using Google, the next time you visit google, even to search for local pizza parlours, you'll find pop-up ads for alcohol and abortion clinics.
The social media, like Twitter and Google already censor web content to suit local host countries like China. Do they do that because they are more passionate about freedoms than the entertainment industry? No they do it because they are most passionate about big profits, and will do just about anything to be a powerful force in every country on the planet, no matter what the norms of freedom of speech are in those countries.
Stop worrying about the fate of a few pirates, and start looking at the real issue of freedom and piracy, as threatened by big money tech companies.... today.... not in some mythical future.
PS: I'm totally concerned about freedom and privacy, which is why I don't have Facebook, Twitter or MySpace accounts.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1284
Lives for gear
 
brockorama's Avatar
 

rack gear, really you are funny. Can you sense the sarcasm? I asked you once before what your plans would be. What exactly would you propose to bring the "lawless" internet back in line? Personally, I can't think of any organisation from the USA I would trust with that huge endeavor. The people you give that power to would be 10 times worse than your tech companies have shown. Wasn't it your wall street that plunged the entire world into a 5 year recession with no signs of improvement? There is not one organisation powerful enough to control the lawless internet, that anyone in their right mind would ever trust. Seriously, give your head a shake man. A "Big Brother" of any kind will be a disaster in this scenario. Can't you see that? What's in it for you? Quit crying about the artists and come clean. What's in it for you?
Old 20th March 2012
  #1285
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
You said "If they work, they have the right to be paid." and I said "A musician doesn't have a "right" to be paid by the audience simply for working hard."
'Audience' implies they are consuming the product, taking advantage of my work.
Again, my issue with you is you are operating on the semantic side of the debate.
No, if no one buys my album I wont be paid. WE all get that. There has never been an issue about that. The issue we are all debating is when someone consumes the product because they like it, and the workers don't get paid.
That is as much a labour rights issue as any other worker not being paid.
I fail to see the difference between a factory owner not paying an employee, and someone obtaining my album and not paying me. I have a right to be paid.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1286
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brockorama View Post
A "Big Brother" of any kind will be a disaster in this scenario.
Check out what Google, Facebook and Apple are up to.
You're sleepwalking into a highly controlled, highly monetized internet, while swallowing the inducement to look the wrong way (at the music industry).
Old 20th March 2012
  #1287
Lives for gear
 
brockorama's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Apple all have embedded software to track your every move geographically, and track your movements on the internet.
Actually, some cookies and a bit of javascript is far from what most users are concerned about. If you knew anything about software you would know that. The stuff you speak of is simple code and automates a lot of procedures. It really does not invade privacy, like some kind of back door code would allow. I hear "sky is falling" types spreading these client side software horror stories all the time. So far, these huge companies are using their software as advertised. If they didn't there would be a huge push back from the tech sector gurus and many thousand lawsuits filed. Quit trying to scare people, so you can try to put a big brother in charge of the internet. It ain't happening. Next.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1288
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brockorama View Post
Actually, some cookies and a bit of javascript is far from what most users are concerned about. If you knew anything about software you would know that.
Actually it's a very hot topic.
They are collecting reams of data about you, where you go everyday, and what you do. If you don't sign up to Google's privacy policies you can't have a YouTube account, or even use an Android powered phone!
Meanwhile, you cry about a loss of privacy due to the entertainment industry.
You're swallowing the lines fed you by the most powerful, most wealthy companies in America.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1289
Lives for gear
 
brockorama's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Check out what Google, Facebook and Apple are up to.
You're sleepwalking into a highly controlled, highly monetized internet, while swallowing the inducement to look the wrong way (at the music industry).
I want nothing more than for for artists and musicians and filmmakers to be compensated for their efforts. This is not a cut and dried "lets put a big brother" type org. in charge of the internet. That's like making a bunch of fat guys, night watchmen at the chocolate factory. I think everyone agrees with you about artists rights. Its the other million implications this opens up. Its a huge can of worms. It needs 100% cooperation from all parties involved. Its like the creation of the midi standard. Its the last time I can remember a bunch of suits agreeing on anything. It was a beautiful thing. Still is.
Old 20th March 2012
  #1290
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

SOPA is dead.
Hadopi (in France) doesn't restrict your web privacy, only the 'freedom' to rip off content creators.
So, you are most fearful of the entertainment industry controlling your internet freedom and privacy? But you don't think Wikileaks and Anonymous incidents will impact the web, or Apple, Google, Facebook's battle for financial supremecy? The Facebook mission statement is to be the one stop shop for all your internet use. They want to control the whole web.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Huptus / So much gear, so little time!
3
Led / For those we have lost. Memorials, RIPs & Obituaries
11
GilWave / For those we have lost. Memorials, RIPs & Obituaries
34

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.