Thanks for the response. This is just a crazy idea I came up with on my own. I was reading The Dancing Wi Lu Masters and got my first brain bending taste of entanglement. At the same time I saw a documentary describing how no information could every travel beyond the event horizon of a black hole. For years the idea has nagged at me and I've asked quite a few physicist why it would not work and have never got an answer that satisfied. But that's probably due more to my stupidity than anything. But even taking spin out of the scenario, can't other things happen to the entangled particle other than a change in spin that we might be able to observe?
I don't think so. Entanglement. One particle goes through the event horizon. We stay on this side and observe what happens to the other. Some say the energy of the black hole breaks the entanglement. But how will we know till we try it?
I've always wondered if we would one day be able to use entangled photons to peer beyond the event of a black hole. Keep one particle in an observable state and send one through the black hole. Something is bound to happen and it might give us some insight into what exists beyond the event horizon. This experiment sounds like a step toward that possibility.
Lessig is one of the more brilliant minds of our generation. Don't forget his efforts to bring Microsoft to task when that seemed an insurmountable obstacle. I've read some of his books and whether you agree with him or not, he as a way of attacking an issue and providing deep, insightful arguments. He's also very good at taking complex issues and distilling them down so that the average person can understand them. Don't count him out before he begins. If he manages to get some air time, he might be able to make a real difference. Either way, when one of our best minds announces his intention to take on a real issue in our society I think that's a good thing.
Yes! I actually worked at a paper that used these things and was put in charge of the project. Doomed to failure from the beginning. And a warped corporate mentality to boot.
I was seriously hoping for some kind of resurrection of the character played by Christina Hendricks in "Our Mrs. Reynolds" and "Trash." I'm sure some of you remember the salaciously hot redhead.
It's a shame when shows like Firefly get axed when so much crap survives. But, I hate to admit it, I missed Firefly on TV and only got hip to it on DVD. What a shame.
I think it's a tribute to Joss that he got the movie made at all. And anyone who saw the film knew it was the end.
This sound like a Windtrap to anyone else. I love it when something I read about in a sci-fi book 20 years ago comes to life in a practical application.
Strategy sounds good, but what impresses me is the fighting spirit. Too many companies have taken the paycheck, only to see what made them great in the first place whither away. Smart, I don't know, but I gotta admire the fight.
Do as you wish. Embellish, paraphrase, whatever you like. Any you're right about the list. That was the perfect forum. Comprised of people on both sides of the issue that really care about fixing this damn mess.
As an aside, I saw a post from Brad King (he covers this stuff for Wired and is a regular on the soup list) hinting about the next wave of CD's. I't possible something like this may be in the works among the major labels. Very watered down and still restrictive on personal rights, but it will be interesting to see if the rumors pan out.
Thanks for the kind words. I really do believe in this idea, even though I don't think I did it justice in my original rant. When it first ocurred to me, I found the list where the industry talks digital and threw it out there. It got some interesting response, but nobody seemed to take it and run. This was back when everyone and their mother was launching a new company in digital music and I got a lot of "well, get the VC and build it" type comments. That wasn't my goal. I was just hoping to offer what I thought would be a viable model in the digital age.
For some reason, the concept generated a lot of buzz in Europe.
Last, I know it's rather arrogant to post the same comment in two discussions relating to the same topic, but I thought it relevant. Not trying to beat a dead horse.
Thank goodness!!! I proposed this idea to a digital music list almost two years ago hoping that things would evolve this way. The labels could marginalize piracy if they approached the problem intelligently.
The Nature of Demand It seems to me one of the key problems facing the music industry in the digital age is the "commodity" approach to marketing music. Who was the genius that first determined that the real product is a piece of plastic? When I buy a CD, it's not because I simply want to be able to play the music at my leisure. At the core of every music purchase is a connection between the artist and the consumer. For some, it's an association of ideals. For others, it may be image, lust, identity, craft or a myriad of other possibilities. This is the real nature of demand in this business and it's being completely ignored under the current model.
Pissing Off the Consumer This whole idea came to me as I was driving to work one day listening to "Celebrity Skin." I'm on my third copy now and it irks my hide a little each time I buy a CD that I have previously owned. Especially considering the fact that I know so little money is going to the artist.
Why can't I just buy personal rights to the piece of work and pay a media fee for whatever form of media I choose as a playback device? If I lose the CD, why can't I just pay a reasonable media fee to replace it? Why can't I be a patron of the artist rather than a consumer of plastic? The value of a CD is in the beauty of the work, not in its physical manifestation.
In a Perfect World I'd pay $25 bucks for a CD. It would come with a serial number. I'd go to a Web site managed by the artist or their representatives and register. Once registered, I'd be able to download the CD in MP3 format. Maybe I'd get access to a couple of bonus tracks as well. Maybe I'd like a second copy of the CD or a tape for my car. I'd be able to buy a second copy for 5-7 bucks. Call it a media fee.
A Different Approach Now here's the real power of this model. Now that I've registered, the artist can send me an email telling me about what's going on in their creative life every now and then. Maybe I'd be able to get an early copy of the next album in MP3 format for pre-ordering. Maybe the artist could send me a link to some live tracks from concerts or some things they have been playing around with in the studio between major releases. Maybe they could point me to a couple of older albums I might be interested in. Maybe once I have purchased the rights to three albums I would achieve "distinguished patron" status that allows me special access to other material. That's value. Now I feel like I have a relationship with the artist. Now I feel like a patron who helps support the artist so they can spend their time working on their art. Now the artist has a direct way to build a relationship with me the fan. Foster that relationship and the artist is meeting the real demand of a music consumer.
Maybe when the artist comes to town, they can put on a special show at a small venue for "distinguished patrons." I think a show like this would be good for the artist and the patron. The artist would know they are performing for a select group that appreciates their craft and has shown it by supporting them. The patron gets to see his or her favorite artist up close and personal. The patron would be willing to pay a higher price as well. The next day, maybe a special commerative t-shirt would be available at the web site when the patron logs in.
Also, think about how valuable the database would be.
Watch the Money Roll In So under this scenario, I'd probably spend at least a couple hundred bucks with an artist. Under the current model, I might have shelled out $100 for a CD and a couple of concert tickets. Why allow labels to take so much money for "managing" the artist, when what they really should be doing is managing the relationship with between the artist and the patron? The marketing potential under this model is a no brainer. Some might abuse it, some might manage it well. At the end of the day, it's the relationship that counts. Piss off your registered fan base with a load of spam and chances are the fan won't cough up any more dough. Provide a real value to registering and watch the money roll in. The better an artist manages the relationship, the more money they make. Make the management earn their keep for a change.
This Kills the Napter Problem Piracy will never go away. Instead of trying to limit access to an artist's work, why not take a different approach... provide real value for paying for the work. Why would I spend hours trolling Napster for bad MP3's encoded at different bit rates and labeled with no common format when I can just buy the CD and have access to clean copies encoded at a high bit rate for my desktop machine and maybe another set encoded at a low bit rate for my car or portable player? Napster's cool, but face it, it's still a pain-in-the-ass. Today's average MP3 collection is a sloppy mess. Why would I pirate when buying the work and registering offers me real value? Sure some people will pirate. Face it folks, it's going to happen no matter what. The loss from piracy would be more than covered by the additional revenue. This would also go a long way to killing the demand for used CD's.
Eviscerate The Damn Middlemen I'm offended that the record companies skim off such a disproportionate amount of income from the process compared to the value they inject into the transaction. They get away with it because they control the distribution channel. That control is dying and all the industry seems to want to do is come up with another way to protect it. Wake up! Fans are pissed off. Artists are pissed off. Everyone is sick and tired of paying twenty bucks for a CD and knowing that the artist only ends up with a buck or two. That's why everyone is sucking songs off of Napster. We're all tired of feeding your machine. Let go and start fresh. Didn't most people in the business get into management or promotion or whatever because they loved music? Wouldn't it be nice to get back to that rather than working in a system that is basically a leech feeding upon both artist and consumer?
Someday Soon An new act is going to make it big direct. No label. No management. No distribution deal. Self-financed. Self-promoted. Self-Published. Another possibility is a major act going direct successfully. The day is coming soon and when it happens, a lot of people in this business are going to face a rude wake-up call. Why not make a deal now while you still have a chance?
I never understood why everyone has it in for Jon Katz... until now. What a windbag. Seems like he thinks every bit of efluvium that drips from his keyboard should be a all-encompasing pontificating view of whatever idea he just encountered and now wants to make his own. Fuck, you'd think the guy would have read the Salon piece on this and known better than to write this tripe...
Seeing as I don't work in the music industry, I've been a little hesitant to post this, but I'm feeling a little froggy today. If I'm being a little presumptuous feel free to hack me to shreds, but here goes:
The Nature of Demand It seems to me one of the key problems facing the music industry in the digital age is the "commodity" approach to marketing music. Who was the genius that first determined that the real product is a piece of plastic? When I buy a CD, it's not because I simply want to be able to play the music at my leisure. At the core of every music purchase is a connection between the artist and the consumer. For some, it's an association of ideals. For others, it may be image, lust, identity, craft or a myriad of other possibilities. This is the real nature of demand in this business and it's being completely ignored under the current model.
Pissing Off the Consumer This whole idea came to me as I was driving to work one day listening to "Celebrity Skin." I'm on my third copy now and it irks my hide a little each time I buy a CD that I have previously owned. Especially considering the fact that I know so little money is going to the artist.
Why can't I just buy personal rights to the piece of work and pay a media fee for whatever form of media I choose as a playback device? If I lose the CD, why can't I just pay a reasonable media fee to replace it? Why can't I be a patron of the artist rather than a consumer of plastic? The value of a CD is in the beauty of the work, not in its physical manifestation.
In a Perfect World I'd pay $25 bucks for a CD. It would come with a serial number. I'd go to a Web site managed by the artist or their representatives and register. Once registered, I'd be able to download the CD in MP3 format. Maybe I'd get access to a couple of bonus tracks as well. Maybe I'd like a second copy of the CD or a tape for my car. I'd be able to buy a second copy for 5-7 bucks. Call it a media fee.
A Different Approach Now here's the real power of this model. Now that I've registered, the artist can send me an email telling me about what's going on in their creative life every now and then. Maybe I'd be able to get an early copy of the next album in MP3 format for pre-ordering. Maybe the artist could send me a link to some live tracks from concerts or some things they have been playing around with in the studio between major releases. Maybe they could point me to a couple of older albums I might be interested in. Maybe once I have purchased the rights to three albums I would achieve "distinguished patron" status that allows me special access to other material. That's value. Now I feel like I have a relationship with the artist. Now I feel like a patron who helps support the artist so they can spend their time working on their art. Now the artist has a direct way to build a relationship with me the fan. Foster that relationship and the artist is meeting the real demand of a music consumer.
Maybe when the artist comes to town, they can put on a special show at a small venue for "distinguished patrons." I think a show like this would be good for the artist and the patron. The artist would know they are performing for a select group that appreciates their craft and has shown it by supporting them. The patron gets to see his or her favorite artist up close and personal. The patron would be willing to pay a higher price as well. The next day, maybe a special commerative t-shirt would be available at the web site when the patron logs in.
Also, think about how valuable the database would be.
Watch the Money Roll In So under this scenario, I'd probably spend at least a couple hundred bucks with an artist. Under the current model, I might have shelled out $100 for a CD and a couple of concert tickets. Why allow labels to take so much money for "managing" the artist, when what they really should be doing is managing the relationship with between the artist and the patron? The marketing potential under this model is a no brainer. Some might abuse it, some might manage it well. At the end of the day, it's the relationship that counts. Piss off your registered fan base with a load of spam and chances are the fan won't cough up any more dough. Provide a real value to registering and watch the money roll in. The better an artist manages the relationship, the more money they make. Make the management earn their keep for a change.
This Kills the Napter Problem Piracy will never go away. Instead of trying to limit access to an artist's work, why not take a different approach... provide real value for paying for the work. Why would I spend hours trolling Napster for bad MP3's encoded at different bit rates and labeled with no common format when I can just buy the CD and have access to clean copies encoded at a high bit rate for my desktop machine and maybe another set encoded at a low bit rate for my car or portable player? Napster's cool, but face it, it's still a pain-in-the-ass. Today's average MP3 collection is a sloppy mess. Why would I pirate when buying the work and registering offers me real value? Sure some people will pirate. Face it folks, it's going to happen no matter what. The loss from piracy would be more than covered by the additional revenue. This would also go a long way to killing the demand for used CD's.
Eviscerate The Damn Middlemen I'm offended that the record companies skim off such a disproportionate amount of income from the process compared to the value they inject into the transaction. They get away with it because they control the distribution channel. That control is dying and all the industry seems to want to do is come up with another way to protect it. Wake up! Fans are pissed off. Artists are pissed off. Everyone is sick and tired of paying twenty bucks for a CD and knowing that the artist only ends up with a buck or two. That's why everyone is sucking songs off of Napster. We're all tired of feeding your machine. Let go and start fresh. Didn't most people in the business get into management or promotion or whatever because they loved music? Wouldn't it be nice to get back to that rather than working in a system that is basically a leech feeding upon both artist and consumer?
Someday Soon An new act is going to make it big direct. No label. No management. No distribution deal. Self-financed. Self-promoted. Self-Published. Another possibility is a major act going direct successfully. The day is coming soon and when it happens, a lot of people in this business are going to face a rude wake-up call. Why not make a deal now while you still have a chance?
Apologia... I've had all this bouncing around in my head for some time now. I honestly planned on writing it up as a coherent article. If I waited till I had time to do it, I would never have gotten around to it. I'm truly sorry to have to present it in such a disjointed rant.
I don't have a chip on my shoulder. I truly love music. I work for a living. I don't have the kind of talent musicians have. The mere fact that there are beautiful souls out there producing such wonderful works of art makes the drudgery of my day to day a little brighter. I'm willing to pay for that. As a matter of fact, I'd feel damn privileged to be part of a support base that allows an artist to focus on their art instead of schlepping food at a restaurant for a living. I just wish doing it under a the current model didn't leave such a bitter taste in my mouth. Fix it and I guarantee you'll make more money, see a more diverse range of work and happier artists and consumers.
The artist is the creator of beautiful things.
To reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim.
The critic is he who can translate into another manneror a new material his impression of beautiful things.
The highest, as the lowest, form of criticism is a mode of autobiography.
Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful thing are the cultivated. For these there is hope.
They are the elect to whom beautiful things means only Beauty.
There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.
The nineteenth century dislike of Realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass. The nineteenth century dislike of Romanticism is the rage of Caliban not seeing his own face in a glass.
The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium. No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.
No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style. No artist is ever morbid. The artist can express everything.
Thought and language are to the artist instruments of an art.
Vice and virtue are to the artist materials for an art.
From the point of view of form, the type of all the arts is the art of the musician. From the point of view of feeling, the actor's craft is the type.
All art is at once surface and symbol.
Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril.
Those who read the symbol do so at their peril.
It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.
Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work is new, complex, and vital.
When critics disagree the artist is in accord with himself.
We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely.
All art is quite useless.
- Oscar Wilde
Preface to "The Picture of Dorian Gray"
I also understand that the Hobbiton set is still there and is being turned into a theme park where you can actually rent out rooms in the hobbit holes
I'm afraid that's not the case. The farmer who owned the land wanted it left intact with the facades and everything else, but Jackson/Newline took packed it all up and everything is sitting in storage somewhere.
Also, to settle the Hobbit question, the rights for The Hobbit are not the same as the Hobbit and a recent interview with Jackson revealed that it may be possible to obtain them, but it'ts a legal and finalcial mess. Too many hands in the pot kind of thing. Still, if the LOTR is as much of a hit as I think it will be, I can't imagine them not doing The Hobbit.
But does anyone really think that protest, bumper stickers and popular support will really do anything to make the feds pull back? We're talking about the Bush administration here. It might be better to put the money into some hired gun lawyers. I think the only way to win this one is a good fight in the courts. Otherwise, our friend from Russia will be the poster boy for what happens when you f##k with the DMCA.
I can see it now. They will come out with a few feel good gestures and then the offensive gestures will contaminate the net. Can you imagine chat programs with these things?
Wouldn't a balloon be better for this? Rather than inflate a big ball around the equipment, just attacth a balloon and inflate it when you need to move to another location.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry fellas. I got this. I saved my Powerbook 5300c from years back. When they come, I'll be ready.
Thanks for the response. This is just a crazy idea I came up with on my own. I was reading The Dancing Wi Lu Masters and got my first brain bending taste of entanglement. At the same time I saw a documentary describing how no information could every travel beyond the event horizon of a black hole. For years the idea has nagged at me and I've asked quite a few physicist why it would not work and have never got an answer that satisfied. But that's probably due more to my stupidity than anything. But even taking spin out of the scenario, can't other things happen to the entangled particle other than a change in spin that we might be able to observe?
I don't think so. Entanglement. One particle goes through the event horizon. We stay on this side and observe what happens to the other. Some say the energy of the black hole breaks the entanglement. But how will we know till we try it?
I've always wondered if we would one day be able to use entangled photons to peer beyond the event of a black hole. Keep one particle in an observable state and send one through the black hole. Something is bound to happen and it might give us some insight into what exists beyond the event horizon. This experiment sounds like a step toward that possibility.
Lessig is one of the more brilliant minds of our generation. Don't forget his efforts to bring Microsoft to task when that seemed an insurmountable obstacle. I've read some of his books and whether you agree with him or not, he as a way of attacking an issue and providing deep, insightful arguments. He's also very good at taking complex issues and distilling them down so that the average person can understand them. Don't count him out before he begins. If he manages to get some air time, he might be able to make a real difference. Either way, when one of our best minds announces his intention to take on a real issue in our society I think that's a good thing.
Yes! I actually worked at a paper that used these things and was put in charge of the project. Doomed to failure from the beginning. And a warped corporate mentality to boot.
I was seriously hoping for some kind of resurrection of the character played by Christina Hendricks in "Our Mrs. Reynolds" and "Trash." I'm sure some of you remember the salaciously hot redhead.
It's a shame when shows like Firefly get axed when so much crap survives. But, I hate to admit it, I missed Firefly on TV and only got hip to it on DVD. What a shame.
I think it's a tribute to Joss that he got the movie made at all. And anyone who saw the film knew it was the end.
Uh... tap water???
This sound like a Windtrap to anyone else. I love it when something I read about in a sci-fi book 20 years ago comes to life in a practical application.
Fear is the mind killer...
Strategy sounds good, but what impresses me is the fighting spirit. Too many companies have taken the paycheck, only to see what made them great in the first place whither away. Smart, I don't know, but I gotta admire the fight.
A tall tower box is "Well appointed from $6635 in Maple"
There is also a media box selling for $35,000. It's nice work, but I think the guy overestimates the financial worth of his craft.
LarG,
Do as you wish. Embellish, paraphrase, whatever you like. Any you're right about the list. That was the perfect forum. Comprised of people on both sides of the issue that really care about fixing this damn mess.
As an aside, I saw a post from Brad King (he covers this stuff for Wired and is a regular on the soup list) hinting about the next wave of CD's. I't possible something like this may be in the works among the major labels. Very watered down and still restrictive on personal rights, but it will be interesting to see if the rumors pan out.
Thanks for the kind words. I really do believe in this idea, even though I don't think I did it justice in my original rant. When it first ocurred to me, I found the list where the industry talks digital and threw it out there. It got some interesting response, but nobody seemed to take it and run. This was back when everyone and their mother was launching a new company in digital music and I got a lot of "well, get the VC and build it" type comments. That wasn't my goal. I was just hoping to offer what I thought would be a viable model in the digital age.
For some reason, the concept generated a lot of buzz in Europe.
Last, I know it's rather arrogant to post the same comment in two discussions relating to the same topic, but I thought it relevant. Not trying to beat a dead horse.
Thank goodness!!! I proposed this idea to a digital music list almost two years ago hoping that things would evolve this way. The labels could marginalize piracy if they approached the problem intelligently.
The Nature of Demand
It seems to me one of the key problems facing the music industry in the
digital age is the "commodity" approach to marketing music. Who was the
genius that first determined that the real product is a piece of plastic?
When I buy a CD, it's not because I simply want to be able to play the music
at my leisure. At the core of every music purchase is a connection between
the artist and the consumer. For some, it's an association of ideals. For
others, it may be image, lust, identity, craft or a myriad of other
possibilities. This is the real nature of demand in this business and it's
being completely ignored under the current model.
Pissing Off the Consumer
This whole idea came to me as I was driving to work one day listening to
"Celebrity Skin." I'm on my third copy now and it irks my hide a little each
time I buy a CD that I have previously owned. Especially considering the
fact that I know so little money is going to the artist.
Why can't I just buy personal rights to the piece of work and pay a media
fee for whatever form of media I choose as a playback device? If I lose the
CD, why can't I just pay a reasonable media fee to replace it? Why can't I
be a patron of the artist rather than a consumer of plastic? The value of a
CD is in the beauty of the work, not in its physical manifestation.
In a Perfect World
I'd pay $25 bucks for a CD. It would come with a serial number. I'd go to a
Web site managed by the artist or their representatives and register. Once
registered, I'd be able to download the CD in MP3 format. Maybe I'd get
access to a couple of bonus tracks as well. Maybe I'd like a second copy of
the CD or a tape for my car. I'd be able to buy a second copy for 5-7 bucks.
Call it a media fee.
A Different Approach
Now here's the real power of this model. Now that I've registered, the
artist can send me an email telling me about what's going on in their
creative life every now and then. Maybe I'd be able to get an early copy of
the next album in MP3 format for pre-ordering. Maybe the artist could send
me a link to some live tracks from concerts or some things they have been
playing around with in the studio between major releases. Maybe they could
point me to a couple of older albums I might be interested in. Maybe once I
have purchased the rights to three albums I would achieve "distinguished
patron" status that allows me special access to other material. That's
value. Now I feel like I have a relationship with the artist. Now I feel
like a patron who helps support the artist so they can spend their time
working on their art. Now the artist has a direct way to build a
relationship with me the fan. Foster that relationship and the artist is
meeting the real demand of a music consumer.
Maybe when the artist comes to town, they can put on a special show at a
small venue for "distinguished patrons." I think a show like this would be
good for the artist and the patron. The artist would know they are
performing for a select group that appreciates their craft and has shown it
by supporting them. The patron gets to see his or her favorite artist up
close and personal. The patron would be willing to pay a higher price as
well. The next day, maybe a special commerative t-shirt would be available
at the web site when the patron logs in.
Also, think about how valuable the database would be.
Watch the Money Roll In
So under this scenario, I'd probably spend at least a couple hundred bucks
with an artist. Under the current model, I might have shelled out $100 for a
CD and a couple of concert tickets. Why allow labels to take so much money
for "managing" the artist, when what they really should be doing is managing
the relationship with between the artist and the patron? The marketing
potential under this model is a no brainer. Some might abuse it, some might
manage it well. At the end of the day, it's the relationship that counts.
Piss off your registered fan base with a load of spam and chances are the
fan won't cough up any more dough. Provide a real value to registering and
watch the money roll in. The better an artist manages the relationship, the
more money they make. Make the management earn their keep for a change.
This Kills the Napter Problem
Piracy will never go away. Instead of trying to limit access to an artist's
work, why not take a different approach... provide real value for paying for
the work. Why would I spend hours trolling Napster for bad MP3's encoded at
different bit rates and labeled with no common format when I can just buy
the CD and have access to clean copies encoded at a high bit rate for my
desktop machine and maybe another set encoded at a low bit rate for my car
or portable player? Napster's cool, but face it, it's still a
pain-in-the-ass. Today's average MP3 collection is a sloppy mess. Why would
I pirate when buying the work and registering offers me real value? Sure
some people will pirate. Face it folks, it's going to happen no matter what.
The loss from piracy would be more than covered by the additional revenue.
This would also go a long way to killing the demand for used CD's.
Eviscerate The Damn Middlemen
I'm offended that the record companies skim off such a disproportionate
amount of income from the process compared to the value they inject into the
transaction. They get away with it because they control the distribution
channel. That control is dying and all the industry seems to want to do is
come up with another way to protect it. Wake up! Fans are pissed off.
Artists are pissed off. Everyone is sick and tired of paying twenty bucks
for a CD and knowing that the artist only ends up with a buck or two. That's
why everyone is sucking songs off of Napster. We're all tired of feeding
your machine. Let go and start fresh. Didn't most people in the business get
into management or promotion or whatever because they loved music? Wouldn't
it be nice to get back to that rather than working in a system that is
basically a leech feeding upon both artist and consumer?
Someday Soon
An new act is going to make it big direct. No label. No management. No
distribution deal. Self-financed. Self-promoted. Self-Published. Another
possibility is a major act going direct successfully. The day is coming soon
and when it happens, a lot of people in this business are going to face a
rude wake-up call. Why not make a deal now while you still have a chance?
But since you are a necro dork, how is this funny?
I never understood why everyone has it in for Jon Katz... until now. What a windbag. Seems like he thinks every bit of efluvium that drips from his keyboard should be a all-encompasing pontificating view of whatever idea he just encountered and now wants to make his own. Fuck, you'd think the guy would have read the Salon piece on this and known better than to write this tripe...
(Posted to the Pho list last year),
Seeing as I don't work in the music industry, I've been a little hesitant to
post this, but I'm feeling a little froggy today. If I'm being a little
presumptuous feel free to hack me to shreds, but here goes:
The Nature of Demand
It seems to me one of the key problems facing the music industry in the
digital age is the "commodity" approach to marketing music. Who was the
genius that first determined that the real product is a piece of plastic?
When I buy a CD, it's not because I simply want to be able to play the music
at my leisure. At the core of every music purchase is a connection between
the artist and the consumer. For some, it's an association of ideals. For
others, it may be image, lust, identity, craft or a myriad of other
possibilities. This is the real nature of demand in this business and it's
being completely ignored under the current model.
Pissing Off the Consumer
This whole idea came to me as I was driving to work one day listening to
"Celebrity Skin." I'm on my third copy now and it irks my hide a little each
time I buy a CD that I have previously owned. Especially considering the
fact that I know so little money is going to the artist.
Why can't I just buy personal rights to the piece of work and pay a media
fee for whatever form of media I choose as a playback device? If I lose the
CD, why can't I just pay a reasonable media fee to replace it? Why can't I
be a patron of the artist rather than a consumer of plastic? The value of a
CD is in the beauty of the work, not in its physical manifestation.
In a Perfect World
I'd pay $25 bucks for a CD. It would come with a serial number. I'd go to a
Web site managed by the artist or their representatives and register. Once
registered, I'd be able to download the CD in MP3 format. Maybe I'd get
access to a couple of bonus tracks as well. Maybe I'd like a second copy of
the CD or a tape for my car. I'd be able to buy a second copy for 5-7 bucks.
Call it a media fee.
A Different Approach
Now here's the real power of this model. Now that I've registered, the
artist can send me an email telling me about what's going on in their
creative life every now and then. Maybe I'd be able to get an early copy of
the next album in MP3 format for pre-ordering. Maybe the artist could send
me a link to some live tracks from concerts or some things they have been
playing around with in the studio between major releases. Maybe they could
point me to a couple of older albums I might be interested in. Maybe once I
have purchased the rights to three albums I would achieve "distinguished
patron" status that allows me special access to other material. That's
value. Now I feel like I have a relationship with the artist. Now I feel
like a patron who helps support the artist so they can spend their time
working on their art. Now the artist has a direct way to build a
relationship with me the fan. Foster that relationship and the artist is
meeting the real demand of a music consumer.
Maybe when the artist comes to town, they can put on a special show at a
small venue for "distinguished patrons." I think a show like this would be
good for the artist and the patron. The artist would know they are
performing for a select group that appreciates their craft and has shown it
by supporting them. The patron gets to see his or her favorite artist up
close and personal. The patron would be willing to pay a higher price as
well. The next day, maybe a special commerative t-shirt would be available
at the web site when the patron logs in.
Also, think about how valuable the database would be.
Watch the Money Roll In
So under this scenario, I'd probably spend at least a couple hundred bucks
with an artist. Under the current model, I might have shelled out $100 for a
CD and a couple of concert tickets. Why allow labels to take so much money
for "managing" the artist, when what they really should be doing is managing
the relationship with between the artist and the patron? The marketing
potential under this model is a no brainer. Some might abuse it, some might
manage it well. At the end of the day, it's the relationship that counts.
Piss off your registered fan base with a load of spam and chances are the
fan won't cough up any more dough. Provide a real value to registering and
watch the money roll in. The better an artist manages the relationship, the
more money they make. Make the management earn their keep for a change.
This Kills the Napter Problem
Piracy will never go away. Instead of trying to limit access to an artist's
work, why not take a different approach... provide real value for paying for
the work. Why would I spend hours trolling Napster for bad MP3's encoded at
different bit rates and labeled with no common format when I can just buy
the CD and have access to clean copies encoded at a high bit rate for my
desktop machine and maybe another set encoded at a low bit rate for my car
or portable player? Napster's cool, but face it, it's still a
pain-in-the-ass. Today's average MP3 collection is a sloppy mess. Why would
I pirate when buying the work and registering offers me real value? Sure
some people will pirate. Face it folks, it's going to happen no matter what.
The loss from piracy would be more than covered by the additional revenue.
This would also go a long way to killing the demand for used CD's.
Eviscerate The Damn Middlemen
I'm offended that the record companies skim off such a disproportionate
amount of income from the process compared to the value they inject into the
transaction. They get away with it because they control the distribution
channel. That control is dying and all the industry seems to want to do is
come up with another way to protect it. Wake up! Fans are pissed off.
Artists are pissed off. Everyone is sick and tired of paying twenty bucks
for a CD and knowing that the artist only ends up with a buck or two. That's
why everyone is sucking songs off of Napster. We're all tired of feeding
your machine. Let go and start fresh. Didn't most people in the business get
into management or promotion or whatever because they loved music? Wouldn't
it be nice to get back to that rather than working in a system that is
basically a leech feeding upon both artist and consumer?
Someday Soon
An new act is going to make it big direct. No label. No management. No
distribution deal. Self-financed. Self-promoted. Self-Published. Another
possibility is a major act going direct successfully. The day is coming soon
and when it happens, a lot of people in this business are going to face a
rude wake-up call. Why not make a deal now while you still have a chance?
Apologia...
I've had all this bouncing around in my head for some time now. I honestly
planned on writing it up as a coherent article. If I waited till I had time
to do it, I would never have gotten around to it. I'm truly sorry to have to
present it in such a disjointed rant.
I don't have a chip on my shoulder. I truly love music. I work for a living.
I don't have the kind of talent musicians have. The mere fact that there are
beautiful souls out there producing such wonderful works of art makes the
drudgery of my day to day a little brighter. I'm willing to pay for that. As
a matter of fact, I'd feel damn privileged to be part of a support base that
allows an artist to focus on their art instead of schlepping food at a
restaurant for a living. I just wish doing it under a the current model
didn't leave such a bitter taste in my mouth. Fix it and I guarantee you'll
make more money, see a more diverse range of work and happier artists and
consumers.
Add to that...
news folks...
cool bosses (so my employees don't have to work today).
All Art Is Quite Useless
The artist is the creator of beautiful things.
To reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim.
The critic is he who can translate into another manneror a new material his impression of beautiful things.
The highest, as the lowest, form of criticism is a mode of autobiography.
Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful thing are the cultivated. For these there is hope.
They are the elect to whom beautiful things means only Beauty.
There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.
The nineteenth century dislike of Realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass. The nineteenth century dislike of Romanticism is the rage of Caliban not seeing his own face in a glass.
The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium. No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.
No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style. No artist is ever morbid. The artist can express everything.
Thought and language are to the artist instruments of an art.
Vice and virtue are to the artist materials for an art.
From the point of view of form, the type of all the arts is the art of the musician. From the point of view of feeling, the actor's craft is the type.
All art is at once surface and symbol.
Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril.
Those who read the symbol do so at their peril.
It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.
Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work is new, complex, and vital.
When critics disagree the artist is in accord with himself.
We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely.
All art is quite useless.
- Oscar Wilde
Preface to "The Picture of Dorian Gray"
I also understand that the Hobbiton set is still there and is being turned into a theme park where you can actually rent out rooms in the hobbit holes
I'm afraid that's not the case. The farmer who owned the land wanted it left intact with the facades and everything else, but Jackson/Newline took packed it all up and everything is sitting in storage somewhere.
Also, to settle the Hobbit question, the rights for The Hobbit are not the same as the Hobbit and a recent interview with Jackson revealed that it may be possible to obtain them, but it'ts a legal and finalcial mess. Too many hands in the pot kind of thing. Still, if the LOTR is as much of a hit as I think it will be, I can't imagine them not doing The Hobbit.
page view whore alert!
We put together a Digital Extra package on this yesterday that offers a few more details and has links to some cool Hubble related sites.
But does anyone really think that protest, bumper stickers and popular support will really do anything to make the feds pull back? We're talking about the Bush administration here. It might be better to put the money into some hired gun lawyers. I think the only way to win this one is a good fight in the courts. Otherwise, our friend from Russia will be the poster boy for what happens when you f##k with the DMCA.
I can see it now. They will come out with a few feel good gestures and then the offensive gestures will contaminate the net. Can you imagine chat programs with these things?
for Steve Jobs to plug Pixar during his acceptance speech.
Wouldn't a balloon be better for this? Rather than inflate a big ball around the equipment, just attacth a balloon and inflate it when you need to move to another location.