I don't think the model should be called "dead".
The model itself is good... Supply and demand. What has happened is that the "replicator" (as I read along another thread) HAS been created! But that still does not make it right to acquire something you did not pay for.
Again, I DO think the RIAA needs to get lost, but once they are out of the picture, you are right, the musicians should market their own music, get a bigger cut... ultimately be COMPENSATED for their efforts. How would you feel if you spent a year working on some new creation (music, software, book, etc) spending most of your time working on this project, spending less time at some other job, expecting that when you are done people will love it, fall head over heels for it, and as 100 people pay you for the enjoyment they now get out of it, 10,000 others get their copies free from those 100 who pass it around. How would you then feel about spending another year to create something ELSE? I would think that while SOME might do it again, the majority of artists, software developers, writters, etc would probably spend less hours at their passion/hobby and more hours holding down a job to feed their families.
What *I* would suggest is that we take the RIAA out of the picture, create more sites like the old Riffage.com where musicians themselves can post their music (which allows new artists to easily get into the picture as well) and offer/sell their music that way. You can sample the music, buy the ones you like, the artist gets nearly %100 of the proceeds.
That DOES mean, however, a method of control would need to be imposed so disallow the free replication (or atleast sharing) of this media (whether it's music, software, ebooks, etc)
I think you were missing my original point.
Just because technology now ALLOWS us to get a free copy of something we are being asked to pay for (an illegal action), doesn't mean laws need to be changed to make it legal! If that were the case, then why not change the law to allow murder? After all, technology has allowed us to make guns, so if now I can shoot someone, should it be okay to DO it?
Seems like a lot of people here are all for Napster and Aimster, etc.... "Down with the RIAA"!
In fact, I, myself am hoping the RIAA starts losing some of these legal battles. Perhaps that my hypocritcal side.
One thing I think most everyone seems to be missing is that even if sharing MP3s is not "theft"... It's still not a good thing, and people don't seem to "get it".
Lots of people (music artists) make their living from their music... sure, I know they get only a small percentage of what is actually made from their record sales... I too don't like the RIAA).. but even if they only get 5% of $1,000,000 that is still $50,000 for them to spend on food, bills, house payments, entertainment, etc. If full and outright MP3 sharing becomes totally legal, then perhaps instead of selling a million copies of their album, they only sell 1,000 copies, and the rest of us find it on Napster, Aimster, etc. I doubt that artist would continue to make a living from their music and probably have to find work elsewhere to feed themselves and their families. I can image that by doing that they would have less time to spend creating new music as well as not being able to go on tour as much if they needed to hold down a job... it would be harder for new bands to get started because they wouldn't start off drawing the crowds as much as bands who have been around a long time. I would imagine that this same principal should be used for all electronic media... video games, software, digital books, etc... the people creating these things we use would make a significantly smaller amount of money, forcing many to stop creating new work, in exchange for a job to get the bills paid.
No, I don't really like paying for music.. everyone would like something for free! But at the same time, I certainly don't mind giving some money to a musician, writer, software developer, etc to help support the ones I like in hopes they continue to create content in the future for me to enjoy as well. It's these people's efforts that make MY life fun!
I'm not for the RIAA... I think musicians and the like should get a MUCH larger portion of the money for THEIR creation, but at the same time, let's not go over board by saying if I CAN get a free copy of something, then it should be OKAY to get a free copy.
david
Slashdot Mirror
The model itself is good... Supply and demand. What has happened is that the "replicator" (as I read along another thread) HAS been created! But that still does not make it right to acquire something you did not pay for.
Again, I DO think the RIAA needs to get lost, but once they are out of the picture, you are right, the musicians should market their own music, get a bigger cut... ultimately be COMPENSATED for their efforts. How would you feel if you spent a year working on some new creation (music, software, book, etc) spending most of your time working on this project, spending less time at some other job, expecting that when you are done people will love it, fall head over heels for it, and as 100 people pay you for the enjoyment they now get out of it, 10,000 others get their copies free from those 100 who pass it around. How would you then feel about spending another year to create something ELSE? I would think that while SOME might do it again, the majority of artists, software developers, writters, etc would probably spend less hours at their passion/hobby and more hours holding down a job to feed their families.
What *I* would suggest is that we take the RIAA out of the picture, create more sites like the old Riffage.com where musicians themselves can post their music (which allows new artists to easily get into the picture as well) and offer/sell their music that way. You can sample the music, buy the ones you like, the artist gets nearly %100 of the proceeds.
That DOES mean, however, a method of control would need to be imposed so disallow the free replication (or atleast sharing) of this media (whether it's music, software, ebooks, etc)
I think you were missing my original point.
Just because technology now ALLOWS us to get a free copy of something we are being asked to pay for (an illegal action), doesn't mean laws need to be changed to make it legal! If that were the case, then why not change the law to allow murder? After all, technology has allowed us to make guns, so if now I can shoot someone, should it be okay to DO it?
Seems like a lot of people here are all for Napster and Aimster, etc.... "Down with the RIAA"! In fact, I, myself am hoping the RIAA starts losing some of these legal battles. Perhaps that my hypocritcal side. One thing I think most everyone seems to be missing is that even if sharing MP3s is not "theft"... It's still not a good thing, and people don't seem to "get it". Lots of people (music artists) make their living from their music... sure, I know they get only a small percentage of what is actually made from their record sales... I too don't like the RIAA).. but even if they only get 5% of $1,000,000 that is still $50,000 for them to spend on food, bills, house payments, entertainment, etc. If full and outright MP3 sharing becomes totally legal, then perhaps instead of selling a million copies of their album, they only sell 1,000 copies, and the rest of us find it on Napster, Aimster, etc. I doubt that artist would continue to make a living from their music and probably have to find work elsewhere to feed themselves and their families. I can image that by doing that they would have less time to spend creating new music as well as not being able to go on tour as much if they needed to hold down a job... it would be harder for new bands to get started because they wouldn't start off drawing the crowds as much as bands who have been around a long time. I would imagine that this same principal should be used for all electronic media... video games, software, digital books, etc... the people creating these things we use would make a significantly smaller amount of money, forcing many to stop creating new work, in exchange for a job to get the bills paid. No, I don't really like paying for music.. everyone would like something for free! But at the same time, I certainly don't mind giving some money to a musician, writer, software developer, etc to help support the ones I like in hopes they continue to create content in the future for me to enjoy as well. It's these people's efforts that make MY life fun! I'm not for the RIAA... I think musicians and the like should get a MUCH larger portion of the money for THEIR creation, but at the same time, let's not go over board by saying if I CAN get a free copy of something, then it should be OKAY to get a free copy. david