|
|
#151
10-05-2007, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
If you don't allow artists to profit from the fruits of their labor, many if not most of them will stop producing new music. You can take it to the bank. [/ QUOTE ] LOL Sure buddy, humans havn't been creating for thousands of years prior when no profit incentive was there. I reason that the crappy artists who are only in it for the money will drop out. Good riddance I say! 
|
|
#152
10-05-2007, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If you don't allow artists to profit from the fruits of their labor, many if not most of them will stop producing new music. You can take it to the bank. [/ QUOTE ] LOL Sure buddy, humans havn't been creating for thousands of years prior when no profit incentive was there. I reason that the crappy artists who are only in it for the money will drop out. Good riddance I say! [/ QUOTE ] I'm sure artists will keep creating music, I just don't think they'll be recording it... There is a huge difference.
|
|
#153
10-05-2007, 07:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
How then do you explain the massive downswing in CD sales that occurred at the same time file-sharing became widespread? [/ QUOTE ] OH CHRIST VINYL, AND TAPE SALES ARE OFF TOO! THIS IS MADNESS! You do realize that over 100 million songs have been downloaded from iTunes right? Mayhap that is contributing to the failure of CD's. Not to mention the amount of information we have access to is always expanding so its no wonder that the amount of time people are listening to a CD is decreasing. it's a math formula really. CD = 1, x = information. Time for entertainment = (1/x) and x is increasing towards infinity. There are multiple reasons for why CD sales are off and you just shouting "piracy" makes it seem like you are not knowledgeable of the economic situation at all.
|
|
#155
10-05-2007, 07:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
And again, this isn't a theoretical argument; we KNOW that piracy caused a huge dropoff in CD sales. [/ QUOTE ] Back it up with empirical date that shows correlation and causation please.
|
|
#156
10-05-2007, 07:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] And again, this isn't a theoretical argument; we KNOW that piracy caused a huge dropoff in CD sales. [/ QUOTE ] Back it up with empirical date that shows correlation and causation please. [/ QUOTE ]  edit: is this a post no one outside of SMP would get?
|
|
#157
10-05-2007, 07:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
They are making the assumption that because someone downloaded a song, it was a lost sale.... but that person most likely never would have bought the song even if he/she didn't have the opportunity to procure it for free. [/ QUOTE ] I agree. Taking this one step further, in a situation like the one described above (where a person would download a particular song for free but would never pay for it), wouldn't the artist and record company rather have the person own the song rather than not own the song? I would if I were them.
|
|
#158
10-05-2007, 07:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure there is nothing stopping bands from just putting their music on the internet for free and completely ignore record companies, yet many opt not to. Why is that if they dont want to be paid for their music? [/ QUOTE ] Many are locked into deals that don't allow it. Many still don't realize that distribution is moving that way. Many of them have really bad management. It's shifting towards that though. Bands (Blues Traveler, Coldplay and the rest) are giving away content to encourage ticket sales. I said earlier -- concert ticket sales were up 15% in 2006 while CD sales were down 8%, and that scares the ever-loving [censored] out of record companies.
|
|
#159
10-05-2007, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
Once you admit that you arent against all IP laws, then you (implicitly) imply that you agree that IP can exist. So, this debate isnt about whether IP exists, but about whether or not music should be considered IP. So, essentially: then what is the difference between someone who writes a song and someone who invents a process to make a drug (or whatever aspect of IP you agree with)? [/ QUOTE ] That's a really bad comparison. A patent has a shelf-life of 20 years. A drug is patented with exclusivity shelf life of seven years. A song is copyrighted with a shelf-life of life + 70 years. Why is a song worth 90 years of protection and a life-saving drug is only allowed twenty years of protection with only seven years of exclusivity?
|
|
#160
10-05-2007, 08:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Once you admit that you arent against all IP laws, then you (implicitly) imply that you agree that IP can exist. So, this debate isnt about whether IP exists, but about whether or not music should be considered IP. So, essentially: then what is the difference between someone who writes a song and someone who invents a process to make a drug (or whatever aspect of IP you agree with)? [/ QUOTE ] That's a really bad comparison. A patent has a shelf-life of 20 years. A drug is patented with exclusivity shelf life of seven years. A song is copyrighted with a shelf-life of life + 70 years. Why is a song worth 90 years of protection and a life-saving drug is only allowed twenty years of protection with only seven years of exclusivity? [/ QUOTE ] Because the public interest in having life-improving and life-saving drugs widely and cheaply available is stronger than the public interest in free Black Eyed Peas songs.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
