From: QueeneMUSE@aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 27 2000 - 01:47:11 MDT
In a message dated 7/26/2000 9:12:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Terry@Donaghe.com writes:
>
> Entertainers will have to make their money by selling experiences -
> something which can not be copied (yet) and passed around. Examples are
> live events, interactions with fans, interactive games, etc.
\
The Dead already made that clear, and "experience" can be copied too, and
passed around. The way they handled it was smart. Keep it in the family so
to speak.
It's not about people wanting to keep their music from being passed around.
There seems to be no problem with people passing around free digital formats
of all kinds in private. The legal action only recently arises when other
parties (software companies, servers, or whoever) are making a profit off the
artists without the obligatory residuals: which usually amounts to a teeny
small percentage of sales. Without sales, there is no percentage... but still
someone's cashing in... even if only to a small profit margin throug
advertising.
As much as I love freedom, and agree that pirating is uncontrollable, and we
have to face facts, as an artist, I can see why Napster and any other company
that profits from pirating would rankle. Bootlegs too, as much as we love
them, are unethical.
Yet they will continue to exist, be bought and sold, and people will go to
jail over it.
If a fan loves my art, let him copy it off my website, or hell - I'd rather
e-mail it to the person MYSELF for free than have you make a profit off me
and laugh in my face.
IMO, This is the unethical act, albeit clever: making money off a product you
don't own -- not the copying or sharing itself for enjoyment by users.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:11 MST