On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 08:11 +0000, Rob Myers wrote: > Elizabeth Stark wrote: > > I disagree. I think his statement highlights some of the major power > > imbalances between labels and artists in the industry. > > Absolutely. > > We also cannot simply substitute CC licensed music for un-Free music. > With culture, unlike software, the devil is in the details;
The devil is not in the details with software? Amazing! > you can't > make a functional equivalent to a NiN album the same way you can make a > functional equivalent to UNIX. If I like NiN, I cannot substitute > something that sounds a bit like NiN but not as good. Wow, that nostalgia heroin really has a grip on you. In my view its way easier to substitute for a specific piece of music (or a band's lifetime output) than a piece of software. If I can't find a favorite CD, it ticks me off, but then I listen to some other favorite music, or discover some new favorite music, and am pretty darned happy. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself, if I never heard my favorite band (Sonic Youth) ever again, I would hardly be worse off, even though listening to them is ecstasy, simply because there is so much other mindblowingly great music to listen to. If I've lost some software, chances are I need to obtain it again, there is no direct substitute, as the devil is in the details. In the fullness of time I or someone could create a functional equivalent, but I can't wait. And if I'm an organization, I'm thoroughly locked into MS Office or Oracle or whatever because my business processes rely on lots of little details that functional equivalence does not suffice for without a massive reimplementation effort. > And nor can Trent Reznor. This is the classic example of how proprietary > production alienates *producers* from what they produce. True enough. :) -- http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
