What is stopping an artist purchasing a copy of the recording that was made of their performance, manufacturing copies of it and then selling those copies? Don't forget, the recording is by no means equivalent to the live performance. An artist also has equal (if not more) opportunity than anyone else to record their own performances. It is not technology that is necessarily culpable for any displacement, but unequal access to it. That may well have long been a case of the haves vs the have nots, but there are a hell of a lot of haves these days when it comes to recording, distribution and publishing. The key remaining inequality is the mercantile privilege of copyright - designed for the haves (in terms of lobbying power and legal resources). There is only one force in this world mighty enough to take on the recording industry (whilst they still have power), and that is the people. If you transfer your copyright to the people, they will protect it and fiercly counter any corporation who dares appropriate it. That means artists should stop putting barbed wire around their art to preserve the ability for record labels to monopolise it in the future - labels pay a pittance for the privilege anyway (for those artists who don't end up in debt to them). And until an artist is as rich as Cliff, they have no power to exploit their notional monopoly without a label. So, let's help persuade artists to stop kidding themselves that they can be their own labels and make monopoly money. An artist should sell their art to their audience with no monopoly retained. CC-NC is a Naive Con. One can suggest using a copyleft licence such as CC-SA if there's doubt concerning the ability of the people to otherwise protect their intellectual property.
_____ From: Eliot P. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 28 October 2007 5:13am To: [email protected] Subject: [FC-discuss] Transcended Value in Recording Industry A major issue in intellectual property is common depreciation. What is that? Well on one hand, the profit of a real estate investment, is not taxed as highly because the value of the property is depreciated. It doesn't matter whether the property is old or new.. That makes this a maor income generating opportunity for real estate owners. They can withdraw money since their tax is minimal. But being a rock star is not like being a real estater. Believe me, I know all about rock music. OK so when I go to do rock star work, my work has some value, but there are also costs. Now what if I say that I can rock twice for the same cost.. No that is not true. I can not double rock and roll. But if I have cash to invest, in rock stars, then what I can do is invest for a higher interest. I ell that rock star he has to rock for my money, or I will put a lien on that guitar and drums till he pays off. He tells me some sad story, I can' rock but once, eh. So I get the tape recorder, and come over to the concert. I record the concert and now I can double the investment and make twice as much. I keep all of that money. He says I want some of that money. But it was the tape recorder that I used. He can't rock it more than once. And so most technology displaces people . That is a transcendence of their value within an open system where they are not getting feedback and control. In a closed system they would have gotten feedback and would not rock wher there was a tape recorder. Since that technology is going to cost them money. that is what happens with technology and investment. It tends to transcend the stabiliy and speeds thing up. hat happens to everybody. Investment requires interest must be paid, while the worker is offered a conditional employment depending upon his usefulness. But I can still rock and roll..
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
