However...
It's not the artists who put out the "greatest hits" but the record company. Many recording contracts bind the artist to a "best of" release whether they want one or not. Labels like it because they get to sell the songs one more time without having to pay the artist an advance or have the record count towards the artists' delivery requirements ( ie. how many albums they owe the company before they get "released" from their contact).
Does anyone else think that the argument using coal distribution as an example falls apart with the fact that coal is a perishable, unrenewable resource whereas digital recordings are infinitly reproducible. His point assumes one source, but music copying produces many and his model is therefore moot.
Another thing, ASCAP & BMI etc. collect performance revenues but not mechanical royalties or other sources of income.
Slashdot Mirror
In a sane world Mozart would not have died a pauper.
However... It's not the artists who put out the "greatest hits" but the record company. Many recording contracts bind the artist to a "best of" release whether they want one or not. Labels like it because they get to sell the songs one more time without having to pay the artist an advance or have the record count towards the artists' delivery requirements ( ie. how many albums they owe the company before they get "released" from their contact).
Does anyone else think that the argument using coal distribution as an example falls apart with the fact that coal is a perishable, unrenewable resource whereas digital recordings are infinitly reproducible. His point assumes one source, but music copying produces many and his model is therefore moot. Another thing, ASCAP & BMI etc. collect performance revenues but not mechanical royalties or other sources of income.