On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 23:37 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Alex Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > For example, even the cheapest independent film is realistically > > going to cost ~$100k. > > I don't know why you set the lower bound so high. I've seen many > entertaining films made for $1000 or even $200.
I set out the basis of the costs in a previous e-mail. Look, I've seen street performers do very entertaining things in the street for change, from poetry to plays. That's not a serious alternative to theatre, though. > In the absence of copyright, if the film creator doesn't want people > to have copies, they shouldn't distribute it. I don't see how that > would stop films being made at all. Perhaps people wouldn't put > $100000 into a film; but films would still be made, and still be > entertaining and even worth watching. If people aren't willing to put $100k into a film, what you're saying effectively is that film as an art form is dead, because that doesn't pay for two person-years, let alone the equipment and all the other costs. No commercial films would be made, and some significant proportion of the amateur film-makers wouldn't be working either because many of them are doing it as amateurs as their way into the industry. Don't mistake this as me saying that copyright is required; I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that in order to create film, people have to have an income somehow which allows them to work on the film. It's as simple as that. Cheers, Alex. > > Just because a person puts an enormous amount of money into building a > pyramid doesn't mean they have any right to see any of that money > return to them. People will decide what it's worth to them to have it > built in the first place, or to maintain it once it's built. > > > I'm not saying that anyone has a right to be able to do this kind of > > thing profitably, but there is a balance here: if it's not possible > > to do something viably for a living, then few people if any will do > > it. > > I deny your implication that copyright is the only way to allow > creative endeavours to make a living. It's up to the creator to figure > out a way to make money from their labour. They just don't have any > right to impinge on others' freedom while they do so. > _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
