|
|
#121
10-05-2007, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I don't think artists (more acurately in todays world to be some large corporation) are entitled to income from their music. [/ QUOTE ] Why is this? Do you think authors are entitled to income from their books? Actors and directors from their movies? [/ QUOTE ] I fully support their ability to make money, but fining people for sharing books and movies I also find ridiculous. They should spend their time finding ways to really influence people to want to pay for their work for reasons other then scare tactics and quarter million dollar fines. [/ QUOTE ] How are they going to make money, if music is not property, and Big Evil Corporations don't deserve any money for producing and distributing music? How do you plan to have any music -- beyond just sitting around jamming for fun, or cover bands -- if it is not property? Who will make it, for nothing? Who will distribute it, for nothing? 
|
|
#122
10-05-2007, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You may be completely right about this and I may be wrong about the relative importance of CD/song sales to the music industry, but the loss of CD/song sales to piracy is indisputably in the billions. [/ QUOTE ] I don't dispute that -- but it's the record companies losing the money, not the artists themselves. [/ QUOTE ] Why does this matter? I always see people bring it up in arguments about this, but it's irrelevant. Companies have property rights just like individuals do.
|
|
#124
10-05-2007, 04:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It should be pretty obvious based on my posts I don't see music as property, and this isn't like some "out there" point of view, it's supported by a lot people. [/ QUOTE ] My uncle ned says that it is property so you are wrong. Lots of people agreed with him at the family reunion as well. [/ QUOTE ] Awesome. I'm not saying I'm right because X people agree with me. I'm just pointing out that it isn't crazy to think such a thing. I'm posting my opinions on the idea of music as property and others are posting their's. Perhaps there is no objective right or wrong on this question.
|
|
#125
10-05-2007, 04:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] They should spend their time finding ways to really influence people to want to pay for their work for reasons other then scare tactics and quarter million dollar fines. [/ QUOTE ] I generally agree with this statement, but just because they're doing what the law allows them to do and not what they "should" do doesn't make awarding statutory/punitive damages for breaking the law some horrible injustice. [/ QUOTE ] Well yeah I agree. I'm saying we should get rid of the law. I don't really blame them for acting in their own self interest. Well kinda, but not much.
|
|
#126
10-05-2007, 04:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Why does this matter? [/ QUOTE ] Because Drew is claiming that artists are losing money. [/ QUOTE ] Well they are, indirectly. The record company isn't going to sign them to as big a deal if they know they aren't going to be able to make as much off their records because of rampant copying. My point is that it seems as if a lot of people justify downloading/sharing by saying "oh, I'm just taking some small profits from a big evil record corporation, who cares?" when, cliched as it may sound, stealing is stealing.
|
|
#127
10-05-2007, 04:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Why does this matter? [/ QUOTE ] Because Drew is claiming that artists are losing money. [/ QUOTE ] Well they are, indirectly. The record company isn't going to sign them to as big a deal if they know they aren't going to be able to make as much off their records because of rampant copying. My point is that it seems as if a lot of people justify downloading/sharing by saying "oh, I'm just taking some small profits from a big evil record corporation, who cares?" when, cliched as it may sound, stealing is stealing. [/ QUOTE ] Cosmo Kramer: It's a write-off for them. Jerry: How is it a write-off? Cosmo Kramer: They just write it off. Jerry: You don't even know what a write-off is. Cosmo Kramer: Do you? Jerry: No, I don't. Cosmo Kramer: But they do, and they're the ones writing it off.
|
|
#128
10-05-2007, 04:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I don't think artists (more acurately in todays world to be some large corporation) are entitled to income from their music. [/ QUOTE ] Why is this? Do you think authors are entitled to income from their books? Actors and directors from their movies? [/ QUOTE ] I fully support their ability to make money, but fining people for sharing books and movies I also find ridiculous. They should spend their time finding ways to really influence people to want to pay for their work for reasons other then scare tactics and quarter million dollar fines. [/ QUOTE ] How are they going to make money, if music is not property, and Big Evil Corporations don't deserve any money for producing and distributing music? How do you plan to have any music -- beyond just sitting around jamming for fun, or cover bands -- if it is not property? Who will make it, for nothing? Who will distribute it, for nothing? [/ QUOTE ] Why are you assuming they will make nothing? The large majority of people can download any song they want for free, simply downloading isn't being prosecuted so doing something against the law is only a deterrent to a small amount of people, and yet the sky isn't falling. Musicians are still putting out material and making money from it. A lot of fans *enjoy* going out and supporting a band or artist that they appreciate. I myself have bought five albums this year just to get the official copy and support someone I thought was making great music. The artist or label just has to inspire people to want to do it, instead of using scare tactics.
|
|
#129
10-05-2007, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
Well they are, indirectly. The record company isn't going to sign them to as big a deal if they know they aren't going to be able to make as much off their records because of rampant copying. [/ QUOTE ] "big deals" are rare and make up a minuscule amount of recording contracts. [ QUOTE ] My point is that it seems as if a lot of people justify downloading/sharing by saying "oh, I'm just taking some small profits from a big evil record corporation, who cares?" when, cliched as it may sound, stealing is stealing. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say it wasn't. I'm simply correcting some common misconceptions. I can't find the citation for it, but I've read previously that 95% of all contract artists never see a dime from CD sales.
|
|
#130
10-05-2007, 04:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I don't think artists (more acurately in todays world to be some large corporation) are entitled to income from their music. [/ QUOTE ] Why is this? Do you think authors are entitled to income from their books? Actors and directors from their movies? [/ QUOTE ] I fully support their ability to make money, but fining people for sharing books and movies I also find ridiculous. They should spend their time finding ways to really influence people to want to pay for their work for reasons other then scare tactics and quarter million dollar fines. [/ QUOTE ] How are they going to make money, if music is not property, and Big Evil Corporations don't deserve any money for producing and distributing music? How do you plan to have any music -- beyond just sitting around jamming for fun, or cover bands -- if it is not property? Who will make it, for nothing? Who will distribute it, for nothing? [/ QUOTE ] Why are you assuming they will make nothing? The large majority of people can download any song they want for free, simply downloading isn't being prosecuted so doing something against the law is only a deterrent to a small amount of people, and yet the sky isn't falling. Musicians are still putting out material and making money from it. A lot of fans *enjoy* going out and supporting a band or artist that they appreciate. I myself have bought five albums this year just to get the official copy and support someone I thought was making great music. The artist or label just has to inspire people to want to do it, instead of using scare tactics. [/ QUOTE ] In the real world today, yes musicians are still making money. I am talking about the world you want to live in, where music is not property. In your utopian world, you could not buy an album to show your support for a band. In that world, there will still be lots of fans ready to enjoy music--but no one to produce or distribute the music they want to enjoy.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
