From: "Eliot P." <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> References: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 58 Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:11:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
A young lady I knew, Anita Waters is her name, wrote a book about the fact that the use of Reggae Music was the major factor in most of the elections in Jamaica where there were two political parties. I think that Bob Marley was involved withthose elections, but most of the bands are under the umbrella of those politics. Then maybe I would say, that the right to a royalty for music was a result of that election. And that music had little prominent value without an agreement to gather people under the process of politics. I think there are ancillary issues. When Rupert Murdoch takes lot of the ownership of the press, the syndicated writers have to renegotiate with him, since he approaches a status of a controller in that market, presumably. I think that Murdoch owns 100 newspapers. If writers want to sell to me directly, how much will they get? This case shows that it is Murdoch who gives them a copyright, and that their work has nothing to say before that is written. And the music has its legal and financier team. When an input is sent into a system, ther is a response . The same input a second time into a system will cause a change to the environment as it was after the first input. The effects of inputs are accumulated in the environment. When certain institutions are resolved to ignore the changes from all of the inputs into the environment, the results are a localized poverty near to that institution. Usually the inputs will be supplemented with boasts and assurances. All are assured on the ride into hell. Jamaica is for Lovers.. Virginia is for bag ladies ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 4:03 PM Subject: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 58 > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Transcended Value in Recording Industry (Rob Myers) > 2. Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [2/2] (Eliot P.) > 3. Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [1/2] (Eliot P.) > 4. Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [2/2] (Eliot P.) > 5. Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [1/2] (Eliot P.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:39:39 +0000 > From: Rob Myers <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Transcended Value in Recording Industry > To: Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization in > particular <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Fred Benenson wrote: > > > The reason why depreciation won't work for creative works is > > because they don't actually depreciate in physical value -- a song's > > copyright is no less "useful" in its state 20 years after it's useful > > than it is at the time of its creation. I suppose there's an argument > > for notion that copyrights dilute over time as a matter of fashion and > > taste (while most ragtime is copyrighted, much fewer of those works are > > as valuable as they were at the time of their creation due to the > > popular taste of music consumers -- apologies to any ragtime fans on > > this list) this seems a odd and difficult factor for the law to account > > for. > > "Intellectual Property" does not cover the physical value of work, it > covers the value of copying the work. > > Copyright accounts for deprecation. After (e.g.) 70 years the exclusive > value of any work covered by copyright will deprecate 100% in a single step. > > The binary nature of copyright value deprecation fosters the illusion > that IP doesn't depreciate in value whilst under copyright, and so we > see copyright extension and the assumption that copying any copyrighted > work destroys its non-deprecating value. > > Studies show that this value is in fact usually exhausted within just 20 > years. So the "Intellectual Property" covered by copyright usually > deprecates at the rate of 5% a year (probably in more of a curve, but > you get the idea). > > None of this accounts for copyrights that increase in value, or for > works that only become economically valuable once out of copyright (e.g. > "It's A Wonderful Life"). But owning the servers -uh- masters shouldn't > be underrated. > > Deprecation is an interesting and possibly useful idea for tackling the > distortions of IP extremism, although it does concede that IP is a form > of property. > > - Rob. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:58:18 -0600 > From: "Eliot P." <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [2/2] > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <000d01c819ad$a70f6620$057ba8c0@CONQUISTADOR> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:58:18 -0600 > From: "Eliot P." <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 [1/2] > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <000c01c819ad$a64d9cc0$057ba8c0@CONQUISTADOR> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > The parallels which are taken frm > http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=19534 which is a radio discussion by > Loren Goldner and host Bonie Faulkner, "Ficticious Capital;, Real > Retrogression" can be summed in this manner. There are really many > capitalists at work. Some are outdoing others, and they are for the most a > majority in voices running the system. Where there are other capitalists > who are the victims of capital. This is by the outcomes whereby their > investment is losing all value, because they are not competing well. So the > recorder is the valuable technology, or we can say the computer. Many of us > buy computers because we can play recorded music which is available to share > etc. Yet the rest of the issue is that replacement value of the people in > either group, the manufacturers of the computers, or the musicians and their > companies are bound to pay to financiers. They are all just costs within a > larger system. The whole system is spinning away from each of them, and > directing efforts and investments to other projects. That is where they > require the benefit of depreciation, as we all should have some recompense > so tht weare not left behind, in human terms. After all the system which > canibalizes the folks which are meant to be its beneficiaries is not much to > go on.. That is how I suggested how the macro system, is longer term but a > micro system is just there to sort the details of how much rock, and how > much work generally is going to be involved in thesse investments while they > are ultimately destined to fall short in most every case. The issue on > that housing bubble is that the currency it is based upon is an investment > level valuable. And it is necessary to recompensate to take ownership of > something so valued. But the system transcends itself, producing within > itself more investments for shorter intervals using expensive technologies > like international banking, and establishments of foreign factories, and > computer run investment markets that trade billions $$ on time-structured > portfolios for a fraction of a tenth of a point (derivatives). Loren also > has an earthlink home page http://home.earthlink.net/~lrgoldner > > The idealogy of project management seems to understand the management of > access to technologies, where they are used in ways that produce small > effects to be added to work on larger scales. I see the RIAA as a tedious > little self gratified group of nitwits. And if we want to continue the > music industry then it should have some positive effects overall. I > wouldn't give you nothing for nanny, or 50 cent, or any of those sissys. I > like the new Patti Smith album. she sings songs written by the classic > musicians of the 1980's. > > you miight try michael hudson's radio discusions on the value of unregulated > investments in securities (mortgages) during sept and oct. with Bonnie > Faulkner.. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 11:20 AM > Subject: Discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 57 > > > > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to > > [email protected] > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > [email protected] > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > [email protected] > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: Educating upcoming artists on pro-sharing licenses > > (Elizabeth Stark) > > 2. Transcended Value in Recording Industry (Eliot P.) > > 3. Re: Transcended Value in Recording Industry (Crosbie Fitch) > > 4. Re: Transcended Value in Recording Industry (Fred Benenson) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 00:18:21 -0400 > > From: "Elizabeth Stark" <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Educating upcoming artists on pro-sharing > > licenses > > To: "Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization in > > particular" <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: > > <[email protected]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > I don't know of any templates or resources directly on this topic, but > this > > is a good idea. There are certainly more general resources out there (see > > info and videos on creativecommons.org for example.) Care to volunteer to > > make something more specific? :D > > > > On 10/27/07, Denver Gingerich <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > It is evident that recording and publishing companies search for > > > talent on YouTube and similar video sharing services so that they can > > > sign contracts with these people [1]. My impression is that these > > > contracts are often quite exclusive and don't allow the artists to put > > > pro-sharing licenses on their content because the recording or > > > publishing company decides on the licenses (and they generally don't > > > choose pro-sharing licenses). (Comments on the validity of these > > > statements would be appreciated.) > > > > > > I think it would be good for free culture advocates to also search for > > > talent on content sharing sites like YouTube so that we can educate > > > upcoming artists on pro-sharing licenses. It seems that the only > > > education they're getting right now is from the recording and > > > publishing companies that stick a huge legal document in front of them > > > and say "sign here". Do you know if there are any free culture > > > advocates actively trying to contact artists in this way? Are there > > > resources available (ie. e-mail templates) that one can use for > > > discussing pro-sharing licenses with artists that have little > > > knowledge of free culture? > > > > > > Denver > > > > > > > > > 1. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Internet_celebrities_and_breaking_boundaries > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > http://freeculture.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071028/465f0185/attachment-0001.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 00:13:00 -0500 > > From: "Eliot P." <[email protected]> > > Subject: [FC-discuss] Transcended Value in Recording Industry > > To: <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: <001001c81921$358e6a00$057ba8c0@CONQUISTADOR> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > 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.. > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > http://freeculture.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071028/8565242f/attachment-0001.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:05:37 -0000 > > From: "Crosbie Fitch" <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Transcended Value in Recording Industry > > To: 'Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization > > inparticular' <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: > > > <4B34C0087F3E0545B87DBA6180CB6F7007E54E@sir-hewlett.internal.cyberspaceengin
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
