|
|
#171
10-05-2007, 08:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] For everyone saying that there won't be music if there is no IP because artists won't make money [/ QUOTE ] can you please refer us to a post where this viewpoint is expressed? [/ QUOTE ] Freakin's post pretty much says that. [/ QUOTE ] "I'm sure artists will keep creating music" - Freakin [/ QUOTE ] "I just don't think they'll be recording it" -Freakin' This implies a lot and is beyond incorrect. [/ QUOTE ] um, back it up with impirical evidence? How many successful artists do you know who never signed with a label but handled recording, sales & distribution themselves (and on their own dollar)? *note: generally 'indie' artists still go with an 'indie' label. Just because it's not one of the big guys doesn't mean it's not a record deal. 
|
|
#172
10-05-2007, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
"I just don't think they'll be recording it" -Freakin' This implies a lot and is beyond incorrect. edit: What I mean is, that it implies music will stop being spread around instantly(recorded and hosted on internet), I agree, if this did stop it would be very problematic, but it wouldnt happen, people want to spread their music, we might lose elaborate inserts and packaging but who really wanted that anyway? [/ QUOTE ] Saying I dont think music will be recorded isnt saying music will not exist. wrt to what you said: obv anything said about how music would exist without IP laws is only speculation, but I would imagine that bands putting stuff on the internet would decrease a lot more than you want to think. Also, not sure if you saw this the first time "Specifically: given your logic that the amount of enjoyment I get out of an act is relevant to its product's ability to become IP, IF I dont enjoy making music can it be IP? OR, if an inventor likes inventing, does that make it not IP?"
|
|
#173
10-05-2007, 09:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] For everyone saying that there won't be music if there is no IP because artists won't make money [/ QUOTE ] can you please refer us to a post where this viewpoint is expressed? [/ QUOTE ] Freakin's post pretty much says that. [/ QUOTE ] "I'm sure artists will keep creating music" - Freakin [/ QUOTE ] "I just don't think they'll be recording it" -Freakin' This implies a lot and is beyond incorrect. [/ QUOTE ] um, back it up with impirical evidence? How many successful artists do you know who never signed with a label but handled recording, sales & distribution themselves (and on their own dollar)? [/ QUOTE ] We don't need those anymore. And I know 100s of artists who handled recording as tons of my friends are in bands that aren't on a label and have recorded their music in a studio at some point. In response to CMI, I mean, I see where you're going. My yes or no answer would be no, but its obviously a lot more complicated than that.
|
|
#174
10-05-2007, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
Keep in mind in the past few years a lot of artists gained a lot of popularity by people illegaly sharing music. There is no doubt that the music industry as a whole has lost a good amount of money due to pirated music, nobody is disputing that. But let's face it, this is the internet. It's virtually impossible to prevent people from downloading free music. Not only that, but it can be done with incredible ease. Furthermore, this is a law that is not even enforced, so people have no incentive at all to stop. It's ridiculous that some woman, who from what I understand is a single mother and nowhere near wealthy is being charged nearly a quarter mill for a crime she probably didn't even know she committed. Even if she did, the penalty is not justified.
Stupid country.
|
|
#175
10-05-2007, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
No, I'm saying no one will produce or distribute music. There will be people willing to pay, but no product. [/ QUOTE ] I don't get it. If people are willing to pay why would there be no product?
|
|
#176
10-05-2007, 09:39 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. [/ QUOTE ] Well, like I said I don't really have a knowledgable opinion on ALL IP so I can't really give an informed answer on this. Based on what I know now if patents weren't allowed for things such as drugs I think perhaps that would cheapen drug prices (since a patent is essentially a monopoly on making that particular product), however I understand the counter to that is that getting rid of patents may create a situation where funding the creation of other drugs may become unprofitable. But I think companies could adjust and save costs/advertise effectively and other such methods. I mean it's not like the only reason life saving drugs are attempted to be created is for profit. There's a lot of people out there that care for the health of the rest of the world. Just my 2 cents though, like I said I haven't investigated the issue enough to feel that this is a solid opinion on this. [ QUOTE ] 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 ] Consequentialism (assuming patents/IP is needed).
|
|
#177
10-05-2007, 09:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
Please lay out for me how it will work, from start to finish if music is 'free' and no one is forced to buy it. [/ QUOTE ] No one is forced to buy it NOW, and the sky isn't falling.
|
|
#179
10-05-2007, 11:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Please lay out for me how it will work, from start to finish if music is 'free' and no one is forced to buy it. [/ QUOTE ] No one is forced to buy it NOW, and the sky isn't falling. [/ QUOTE ] It's illegal to download it currently, so some people pay for music because it is the lawful thing to do. And there is a deterrent factor with the way the RIAA agressively prosecuting and getting judgements against music sharers. If you could download any song in the world completely free and without legal repercussions, the music industry would profit from concerts only, as well as what would essentially be a donation system. How well does a donation system work, for well, ANY industry?
|
|
#180
10-06-2007, 12:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
It's illegal to download it currently, so some people pay for music because it is the honorable thing to do. [/ QUOTE ] One women is not going to deter 300 million Americans from doing it, just like AIDS doesn't deter people from having unprotected sex. People have to make a moral judgement. And people also have to stop thinking that they are taking down an evil entity. There is nothing wrong with doing what you love for a living.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
