It is currently Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:08 am


All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:41 am
Posts: 81
Location: Toronto, Canada
that just blew my mind. i mean i kinda figured that shit was going on but to see it in the flesh is unreal. how much longer can the industry sustain that?! the system is going to implode much sooner than i thought.

_________________
http://www.flickr.com/mbison/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:27 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:55 pm
Posts: 307



I'm not a Prince fan for some reason I can't really discern,,, but I find this interesting as an arbitrary sign of the pretty murky times,,-- I don't have any steadfast moral certitudes about downloading,, but the phenomena/effect is pretty fascinating in ways... part of what's fascinating about it is that its not really fascinating to anyone. In a sense I think you can liken it to pollution... an issue most anyone is comfortable pointing out is horrible,, an encroaching epidemic,, but that generally doesn't affect anyone's behavior - I think part of this is that we often unconsciously identify ourselves as part of the consumer sector of society and wait for the rules to be handed down from the parental entity... until then,, looting when possible... but ultimately,, like the depletion of the Ozone layer,, this is one of those phenomenons where we won't really know the effects of a new technology until its probably too late...

here's the basic response to Prince across the web,,::
"quit worrying about music piracy, and start making more music. Its supposed to be for the fans isn’t it?"

"These douchebag "artists" have made enough money off of us. It is time to give back."

"i thought ARTISTS did it for the art.. not the money"

"Hate to be the bearer of bad news to Prince, but music was not always recorded in hard copy. There was a time up until the last century that musicians made $$$ one of two ways - scripting and live shows. Quit being a baby and either sell your music or play live. No one wants to hear you whine."

...what most everyone seems to be missing from the point is that the sad conservatisms of the music industry will only be made more conservative by an economic crisis,,, that the hit-based motivations of labels will only accelerate when they begin to worry even more about money -- there are 100 different ways to approach the subject,,, one is to lament the death of the actual record object,,, which I'll always be attached to,, but I can't expect anyone else to be.... Another good one is to analyze the nature of 'theft' being relativized --
In an Adam Smith sense,, Self Interest will always rule,, and that Self Interest is largely enabled by the mass movement pattern that socially affirms it. >> The Sellers have to first figure out what people want... and since people no longer want an object that can be counted,, the entire history of music has been completely/irrevocably transformed before anyone can catch up to the coming consequences...
Somehow the more controversial point that seems to've developed is that music might actually be worth spending money on... why this is a radical idea I'm not sure... I actually really enjoy spending money on music when buying an object,,, unfortunately I'm sure the $ hardly ever goes to the artist since I largely buy old, used records... I work at a homeless shelter where people often walk in and announce things bluntly like "I need a bus ticket" and then storm out when I say I don't have any... I always wonder if that happens around the corner at the comedy club or the coffee shop,,, do people walk in and demand items citing their rights as a citizen?,,, essentially that's a basic attitude you see reflected in the consumer culture... like when someone who works at a mastering studio leaks the new Radiohead record (this happened to Neurosis and they traced it back to someone in the Southern offices) ...leaking seems to be done with the sense that what's on the artist's hard-drive will eventually be valueless public property so soon,, that its free starting at the point of its very inception,, snatching it fresh out of Radiohead's brain {like that time they hadn't even finished the record== http://www.excellentonline.com/story/ne ... leaked-897}...
...like I's saying,, I don't have any hard and fast moral stance on it,,, but you gotta honestly acknowledge a mass movement trying to rationalize making all music free... sitting in complete opposition to the assumption everyone had followed just before now since the beginning of time {that it was of some monetary value},, and if it was another industry based on a physical thing like ice cream,, you would not have the masses insisting that all ice cream ought to be free because that would honestly look like total idiocy,,, it certainly brings a more complex arena to making art,,, which, if you are interested in art, involves you... anyone ever have any strong feelings about the subject?? KEWL// 10-4!



Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:56 pm
Posts: 71
Absolutely! I think most people who aren't artistic or creative completely misunderstand people who are - the idea that 'we do what we do for fun and because we enjoy it' is translated as 'what we do doesn't cost anything or require any effort and therefore isn't worth much'. the number of people (mostly in my retarded family) who have said to me when asked what they want for their birthday "oh don't spend any money, just paint me a picture"... are you fucking kidding me?! that shit takes so much time and energy, and the materials do actually cost quite a bit of money you twits!

I think music is much the same - the creative process is de-valued as if it's something certain people just 'have' as opposed to something you spend your entire life working at - this in particular sticks in my craw because the assumption is that you're just lucky to be blessed with a talent for creating things, af if it's the easiest thing in the world, when the reality is that that making of art is a complete obsession that occupies every waking minute of your life. am I lucky or is it that I actually go home after work and work on my art rather than watching tv for 4 hours? does all that time a musician spends touring count as a holiday, or is it actually hard for them to take time away from work, be away from their families and stay in unfamiliar places all the time? art takes effort, it enriches our lives, and it should be invested in.

the whole idea of huge record companies sinking thoudands of dollars into writing camps, while completely horrifying, is kinda funny in a way because it acknowledges that even a vacuous pop song requires some degree of creative talent that isn't necessarily easy to come by, regardless of how perverted the use of that talent is. I think the consequences of this approach are pretty analogous with what's happened to cinema as well - directors like david lynch can't get funding for new projects, while untold millions are being sunk into movies nobody will ever care about...the impact this had on the quality of cinema is pretty obvious. I could go on about this subject forever, but I'll restrain myself for now.

my favourite quote on the subject of music theft comes from Michael Gira:

“What, are we all supposed to be hippies or anarchists with rich parents or something? I work extremely hard at what I do, with considerable financial and personal risk involved in the making of the music, and the same scenario applies to just about everyone else I know that’s made the disastrous decision to make music a career, so we deserve to be paid for our efforts. You wouldn’t expect a book by an author you admire to be free, nor would you expect an electrician to come to your house and rewire it for free. How are we any different? This is our work, what we do for a living (of sorts), and if you like the final results, buy it, you spoiled brat.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:54 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:13 pm
Posts: 123


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:14 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:11 pm
Posts: 66
The problem with these analogies about free labor is that no one is actually being deprived of due compensation or even credit. There are few cases of anyone either selling copyright music without the artist's consent, or outright plagiarizing.

A better analogy, in this instance, might be something like, suppose you think of a really funny joke. You tell your buddy this joke, and he likes it, so he goes to a party that night and tell the joke his friend told him earlier, while everyone is perfectly understanding that this joke was thought of by you. Now, you don't have a set amount of times the joke can be told. It can't run out. It is your joke, and everyone knows you came up with it, and it can be said any number of times without ever damaging your ability to retell it or get a laugh from it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:56 pm
Posts: 71


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:25 am 

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:36 pm
Posts: 10
Personally, I could go either way on this problem. I don't think any less of you either way if you support an artist monetarily or if you download their work for free. If I had to have gotten all my music from money, I would probably never discovered a large majority of what I listen to. No matter how much I respect and enjoy the artists work, it will not change that fact that I can afford certain hobbies. I realize to that its easy to "stretch" your budget by using leisure money on objects or activities that can not be pirated and then turn around to only get something for free.

The main thing I find interesting is how it is blamed on the new information structures and how they have to adapt in order to make it a viable market. More importantly, people only attribute a decrease in market shares because of this new structure to music, movies, and TV. It seems to be, however, that for hundreds of years, another kind of artist has been giving away their products of work for free for quite some time. Namely, mathematician and scientists, on the daily, give you the fruits of their labor for almost no cost, especially in this new information age. I see very little difference between the musician and the mathematician, other than how they make money. In essence, they are getting paid for services or useful products and their insight on specific areas are just bi-products of their work. We just have set up agencies which support their efforts and in return they teach or solve practical problems.

I'm pretty certain the people in these professions who make new contributions work their ass off as well, but its not technically what they are getting paid for and most of them don't really expect compensation. They did it because they wanted to, and whether they were working or not. I don't mean to say musicians or artists don't have this attitude. I realize too, that institutes do make money from research efforts, but it is a much more symbiotic relationship than I suppose the music industry to the artist. Not only that, but I'd even say that an educational system for the arts exists as well, it just can't support or handle as much load.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:00 pm 

Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:02 pm
Posts: 118
I really see both sides of the situation. Well, I'm "just a spectator", not an artist myself, but I can certainly sympathize with the artists (the ones that really have a stake in it, not freakin Prince, etc). If downloading came with some ethical obligation to support the art you are (maybe temporarily) pilfering, then we would not be having this discussion at all, but the reality is that entering a search term and clicking "download" is such an innocent process, it doesn't feel like any wrong is being done. It becomes much more blatant when using a site/service like bandcamp, and you can enter the dollar amount in a pay-what-you-want model. Then if you enter $0, you must realize that you are really "taking" something from an actual person, or group, rather than the ether that is cyberspace, because you are consciously and actively deleting potential proceeds by zeroing out that field.
Copying has been around forever though. Dubbing tapes or copying CDs and giving them out to friends. You did that in hopes that they would get as into that music as you are and become a fellow supporter. Now, you have a bittorrent client open and people you've never met before are getting it from your shared folders. You are still a participant in getting the word out (or an internet theft ring, as some see it), but in a way that is much less within your control. But if 10 people download an album, and a couple of those people that would not have otherwise heard the band buy the album, or maybe subsequent albums, or go see the band in concert, doesn't the artist come out a little bit ahead? Is the impact, positive OR negative, really even quantifiable? Is internet file sharing as evil to small-to-medium sized bands as Walmart is to small-to-medium sized retailers?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:11 pm
Posts: 66
Read the bottom paragraph on page 70.

http://books.google.com/books?id=tRwsKG ... &q&f=false

Music piracy has actually pushed small labels to the fore-front and it's going to continue to do so. The idea that piracy is causing the artist to lose money is a narrative spun by the large conglomerates who are worried about their own revenue and loosening grip on a market they have had cornered since the gramophone was invented. Let me just come right out and incriminate myself here: Not a single album, shirt, venue ticket, or any other band associated merchandise I have ever purchased came from an artists whose music as I was not familiar with. And I always familiarized myself with it through let's say, nefarious ways. And I own far more merch than your average layman who outright pays for music he might not even like. I have a growing LP collection, shirts from most bands I have seen live, and I pretty hefty CD collection. Another thing we must keep in mind is that most downloads do not represent a lost sale. The way I see it, a download for music that someone would otherwise never listen to can only be good in my book. I'm in a band that has always made it a point to allow the free availability of our non-tangible work. Not to say we're bad-asses or something, because we're actually pretty disorganized and petulant, but shitty attitude aside, I think it's a good principle to stand behind. Sorry, I'm going off on a tangent here. I don't know the forum rules about potentially promotional linking, so I won't do it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Problem.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:10 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:04 am
Posts: 179
Location: Quebexico


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

[ Time : 0.007s | 8 Queries | GZIP : Off ]