Am 12.07.2010 10:31, schrieb Louigi Verona:
I grant, that my point is simplyfied. So to make it more clear:
philosophically I think, attribution would be enough compensation. BUT:
Philosophy does not pay the rent. It is an entirely social issue we talk
about here. I would love to see a Society, in wich an artist can live a
decent live by getting an share of economic wealth unconditional and
would have the opportunity to eachieve luxury by playing concerts and
selling physical copies. Then it would be entirely OK to make
unconditional distribution of recorded music the normal state of
affairs. You, the society, give me enough to eat and to have shelter and
education and medical aid - I, the artist, share my works with you, the
society as well.
But we live in a society, in wich Stalins notion "who does not work,
shall not eat." is commonplace and law.
Complicated problem and I do not think, anybody should try to solve it.
We do not have any authority to decide, what is good or bad. The recent
system claims to decide this by marketshare. But we all know, that the
top10 do NOT guarranty quality and that great works never have any
What you say is a bit like: "Steamboats cannot solve the problem, that
we cannot fly to mars. So let us sink those steamy buggers!"
To completely abolish the concept of intellectual property (gee... I
hate that corporatism the same as you do... ;-) ) will not work and will
not help. All the problems, you have rightfully stated above ( musicians
seldomly make any money in the given system etc) come from the
implementation of the concept and from the economic system, that uses
this concept and not from the concept itself.
This does not sound so bad to me. Maybe 5 years as known today, 10 more
years for commercial copies and a right to say No to use in
advertisement. Could be my sontaneous proposal....
> Then we would be talking about making a living.
These studies show, that intellectual property rights (ouch!! again this
awful word...) are abused today by those who claim to implement it for
the benefit of the authors.
> So, the super famous argument that links IP law to profits is, in my very
Yeah, "reward" would sound nicer but not everything should sound/look
nicer than it is.
Linux-audio-user mailing list