Only on/. would someone make a point to mention that they put on clean underware before leaving their domicile. I think normal people must take clean underware for granted!
Actually labels do not get acts on tours and set up concerts. That is done primarily by the booking agent and to a lesser extent the band management. Sometimes the labels will provide "tour support" which is basically cash (recouped from the artist) to help them out on tour (bus rental, techs, etc)
And in order to get a decent quality recording, a REAL studio is needed, at least for a band. Hip hop, solo artists, electronica etc can all be done with a home project studio for under $25k worth of equipment.
But you are correct, a good mastering engineer is very important. I would say however that the labels and radio are not outdated, but their importance and influence is diminishing somewhat. I will say that if they don't redefine their role in the income chain, they WILL be left out in the near to mid future.
They can do whatever they want within the bounds of their contract (TOS) with their customers. Sometimes those decisions cause them to lose revenue or customers.
But I want to point out a distinction that the first amendment only applies to restrictions on the government.
You miss the point. In a FREE MARKET, there would be NO agreements between the private sector and the government in that regard.
The government WOULD NOT grant monopolies to specific firms, because a free market means just that, a market free from regulation, government subsidies, and governmental interference.
When the government is heavily involved in the market that is often called socialism, authoritarianism, and perhaps sometimes even communism.
I was simply trying to make a joke. My attempt of tying in the old Uranus joke with the losers of the bid was at least partially successful as shown by my #3 Funny moderation.
What if Congress abolished all copyrights effective immediately?
At that point, NO ONE would have ANY rights to their creative works.
I think you fail to see that the reason anyone has ANY rights to control the distribution of their own creative works is because Congress says so. It is NOT an unalienable right, it is NOT a divine right, it is NOT a natural right, it is not part of some sort of the basic foundation of society, culture, or a 'greater intellectual atmosphere'.
Copyrights are NOT a moral issue in the US ANY WAY YOU SLICE IT, it is 100% strictly a legal concept because it ONLY exists due to statues. Congress could abolish it tomorrow if they wanted to.
Ideas are like toothpaste. Once they come out, they are in the open and cannot be put back in. Congress simply says that when the toothpaste comes out of the tube, for a limited time, it belongs to the person it came out of. But after that, it belongs to society. And the ONLY reason copyright exists at all is to give people an incentive to innovate and be creative so that they have a chance of making a profit.
My mom was a sales rep for BMS and also for their sister-company Clairol for many years during the 90's.
One day she got a voice mail that she had to call into a conference call the following Thursday at 10am.
Guess what? All x-thousand other sales reps that were also on the conference call were informed that their positions were all being eliminated in one single motion.
In most US locales, your ISP is NOT operating in the free market. Neither are your phone companies, cable companies, power companies, and/or you water/sewage companies.
WHY?
Because local govenment has granted georgraphic monopolies to specific firms. In fact it's one of the only places you'll find true monopolies; when they are granted, supported, and possibly even subsidised by the government.
In a free market situation we would have many more options, much better choices all because the firms would be competiting for your dollars. This is why the government should be limited to its most basic functions and stay the HELL out of the marketplace!
First off IP Theft = jacking some one's copyright. In other words, in order to steal some one's intellectual property, you would have to go to the US Copyright/Patent/Trademark Office, and change the name on the forms to your own. THAT would be theft of copyright because you have deprived the original owners right to copy (more accurately it would probably be fraud, but that isn't the issue at hand).
Distributing unauthorized copies is simply infringing on some one's exclusive right to copy. The difference might seem small, but in a court of law it is as wide as the grand canyon. I have taken 2 semesters of copyright law in college so I consider myself fairly well educated on the subject.
I do believe "that someone who creates content [has] the right to decide how that content gets disseminated" up to a certain point. Specifically for a very limited amount of time, under 25 years at most. Bug again, the length of time isn't the point.
"If he says you can have it for a dollar, and you just take it because you don't want to pay, it's theft. And I don't need a courtroom or our legal system to tell me that it's wrong."
You are confusing morals with legality. The two are absolutely not one in the same. Is it illegal to run a stoplight if no one else is around? Yeah. Is it immoral? Probably not, PENDING your belief system/personal values.
You also said "just take it because you don't want to pay". But, if we were talking about depriving the owner of something, then yes that would be theft. But making an unauthorized copy of something deprives the owner of nothing (unless you had planned on purchasing it anyway but decided just to get it for free; then the owner would be deprived of potential revenue but that is very hard to make a case for).
I am not saying that making an unauthorized copy of some one's art is ok, just that it is NOT theft. Hopefully that clears things up for you.
I had a "services marketing" course in which each book came with a separate and individual "web key code" which allowed access to their website.
Well, the publisher (Atomic Dog), has supplemental material on their website, but they also have quizzes and tests online too. The prof decided that we were going to have weekly quizzes on the subject as part of our grade and we would take them online at the publisher's website. She would get the report e-mailed to her after everyone finished their quiz.
Essentially, this NULLIFIED the resale market, AND FORCED THE PURCHASE OF THE BOOK BY EVERY STUDENT! The online quizzes were required, and the only way to get online was to buy the book and get yourself an individual access code.
My dad used to work for an airline in Memphis, TN (a few decades ago) and told me that one day a flight landed and they got a radio call that someone lost an item down the lav.
Well, come to find out some woman's wedding ring came off her finger and into the blue juice. So the airline actually dumped the tank in the grass field between the taxiway and the terminal. They took her out there to search for the ring amongst the "lav juice".
As a side note, my friend who is a professional airline pilot told me that sometimes if the seal on the lav dump isn't properly fitting, a chunk of blue ice can develop inside the pipe during flight. Nasty, eh?
Article I Section 8 does not say ANYTHING about Congress and the Fed dealing with education.
And then it goes on further to say that anything not specifically entitled to the Fed is reserved for the states.
I don't see how shit like the the Feds and education, or agriculture, or the FDA, or the BATF, etc etc ever got passed. Could we PLEASE have some politicians with integrity that stick to the founding documents and principles of this country!?!?
Slashdot Mirror
Bush is NOT a hero to the Cato Institute.
Get a clue before you run your mouth, it'll make you look less like an ignorant ass than you just did.
The EPA and FDA are not Constitutional. According to the Constitution they shouldn't even exist. (Article 1 - Section 8)
To be completely honest... I laughed until I cried after reading your post.
That was great man!
Only on /. would someone make a point to mention that they put on clean underware before leaving their domicile. I think normal people must take clean underware for granted!
*rolling eyes*
If I remember correctly it was an IBM commercial.
Submitting info to the Dept of Edu is ENTIRELY VOLUNTARY!
If you don't want the FBI looking through your information, then don't apply for federal aid!
Actually labels do not get acts on tours and set up concerts. That is done primarily by the booking agent and to a lesser extent the band management. Sometimes the labels will provide "tour support" which is basically cash (recouped from the artist) to help them out on tour (bus rental, techs, etc)
And in order to get a decent quality recording, a REAL studio is needed, at least for a band. Hip hop, solo artists, electronica etc can all be done with a home project studio for under $25k worth of equipment.
But you are correct, a good mastering engineer is very important. I would say however that the labels and radio are not outdated, but their importance and influence is diminishing somewhat. I will say that if they don't redefine their role in the income chain, they WILL be left out in the near to mid future.
Let me clarify...
They can do whatever they want within the bounds of their contract (TOS) with their customers. Sometimes those decisions cause them to lose revenue or customers.
But I want to point out a distinction that the first amendment only applies to restrictions on the government.
You miss the point. In a FREE MARKET, there would be NO agreements between the private sector and the government in that regard.
The government WOULD NOT grant monopolies to specific firms, because a free market means just that, a market free from regulation, government subsidies, and governmental interference.
When the government is heavily involved in the market that is often called socialism, authoritarianism, and perhaps sometimes even communism.
... but I know nothing of that.
I was simply trying to make a joke. My attempt of tying in the old Uranus joke with the losers of the bid was at least partially successful as shown by my #3 Funny moderation.
Let's ask a question...
What if Congress abolished all copyrights effective immediately?
At that point, NO ONE would have ANY rights to their creative works.
I think you fail to see that the reason anyone has ANY rights to control the distribution of their own creative works is because Congress says so. It is NOT an unalienable right, it is NOT a divine right, it is NOT a natural right, it is not part of some sort of the basic foundation of society, culture, or a 'greater intellectual atmosphere'.
Copyrights are NOT a moral issue in the US ANY WAY YOU SLICE IT, it is 100% strictly a legal concept because it ONLY exists due to statues. Congress could abolish it tomorrow if they wanted to.
Ideas are like toothpaste. Once they come out, they are in the open and cannot be put back in. Congress simply says that when the toothpaste comes out of the tube, for a limited time, it belongs to the person it came out of. But after that, it belongs to society. And the ONLY reason copyright exists at all is to give people an incentive to innovate and be creative so that they have a chance of making a profit.
My mom was a sales rep for BMS and also for their sister-company Clairol for many years during the 90's.
One day she got a voice mail that she had to call into a conference call the following Thursday at 10am.
Guess what? All x-thousand other sales reps that were also on the conference call were informed that their positions were all being eliminated in one single motion.
Nice, eh?
"what can a girl in IT do when she finds herself on the outside of those cliques of boy coworkers?"
;-)
One word; strip!
...those firms that lost the bid were awarded the Uranus probe contract.
It's their network, they can do whatever they want (forgetting the fact at the moment that they are largely a localized government granted monopoly).
The government is not allowed to limit speech, assembly, association, etc. Everyone else can do that within the realm of their property etc.
In most US locales, your ISP is NOT operating in the free market. Neither are your phone companies, cable companies, power companies, and/or you water/sewage companies.
;-)
WHY?
Because local govenment has granted georgraphic monopolies to specific firms. In fact it's one of the only places you'll find true monopolies; when they are granted, supported, and possibly even subsidised by the government.
In a free market situation we would have many more options, much better choices all because the firms would be competiting for your dollars. This is why the government should be limited to its most basic functions and stay the HELL out of the marketplace!
ps - vote Libertarian!
First off IP Theft = jacking some one's copyright. In other words, in order to steal some one's intellectual property, you would have to go to the US Copyright/Patent/Trademark Office, and change the name on the forms to your own. THAT would be theft of copyright because you have deprived the original owners right to copy (more accurately it would probably be fraud, but that isn't the issue at hand).
Distributing unauthorized copies is simply infringing on some one's exclusive right to copy. The difference might seem small, but in a court of law it is as wide as the grand canyon. I have taken 2 semesters of copyright law in college so I consider myself fairly well educated on the subject.
I do believe "that someone who creates content [has] the right to decide how that content gets disseminated" up to a certain point. Specifically for a very limited amount of time, under 25 years at most. Bug again, the length of time isn't the point.
"If he says you can have it for a dollar, and you just take it because you don't want to pay, it's theft. And I don't need a courtroom or our legal system to tell me that it's wrong."
You are confusing morals with legality. The two are absolutely not one in the same. Is it illegal to run a stoplight if no one else is around? Yeah. Is it immoral? Probably not, PENDING your belief system/personal values.
You also said "just take it because you don't want to pay". But, if we were talking about depriving the owner of something, then yes that would be theft. But making an unauthorized copy of something deprives the owner of nothing (unless you had planned on purchasing it anyway but decided just to get it for free; then the owner would be deprived of potential revenue but that is very hard to make a case for).
I am not saying that making an unauthorized copy of some one's art is ok, just that it is NOT theft.
Hopefully that clears things up for you.
Perhaps you missed the concept that copyright infringement does NOT equate to theft (unless you physically shoplift it out of the establishment).
...unless it is liquidated into cash and kept under your bed!
Anything short of that, and it is still "working" in the economy.
Try taking a college-level economics course sometime.
I had a "services marketing" course in which each book came with a separate and individual "web key code" which allowed access to their website.
Well, the publisher (Atomic Dog), has supplemental material on their website, but they also have quizzes and tests online too. The prof decided that we were going to have weekly quizzes on the subject as part of our grade and we would take them online at the publisher's website. She would get the report e-mailed to her after everyone finished their quiz.
Essentially, this NULLIFIED the resale market, AND FORCED THE PURCHASE OF THE BOOK BY EVERY STUDENT! The online quizzes were required, and the only way to get online was to buy the book and get yourself an individual access code.
Good marketing, but it definitely pissed me off!
My dad used to work for an airline in Memphis, TN (a few decades ago) and told me that one day a flight landed and they got a radio call that someone lost an item down the lav.
Well, come to find out some woman's wedding ring came off her finger and into the blue juice. So the airline actually dumped the tank in the grass field between the taxiway and the terminal. They took her out there to search for the ring amongst the "lav juice".
As a side note, my friend who is a professional airline pilot told me that sometimes if the seal on the lav dump isn't properly fitting, a chunk of blue ice can develop inside the pipe during flight. Nasty, eh?
How did this get modded insightful?
Why feed the troll?!
According to the Constitution we don't!
Article I Section 8 does not say ANYTHING about Congress and the Fed dealing with education.
And then it goes on further to say that anything not specifically entitled to the Fed is reserved for the states.
I don't see how shit like the the Feds and education, or agriculture, or the FDA, or the BATF, etc etc ever got passed. Could we PLEASE have some politicians with integrity that stick to the founding documents and principles of this country!?!?
"Despite any potential improvement in hygene, I can't handle the ass tickling fountain thing."
;-)
I hear the gay guys love it!
"Most of the high-tech toilets I've used, has had the water level so high that your balls usually touch the water when you sit there."
;-)
I'm 24 and don't have that problem. You must be much older, eh?