[p2p-research] Fwd: arguments against applying open/free to other content

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 06:14:53 CET 2008 

some critical remarks on the reality of the long tail:

Is the Long Tail Hollowing Out?

Nicholas Carr, in The
Guardian<http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2080775,00.html>,
summarizing Richard MacManus <http://tinyurl.com/37q7d4>:


"The blogger Richard MacManus recently examined trends in online traffic
over the past five years. He found that between the end of 2001 and the end
of last year, the number of Internet domains expanded by more than 75%, from
2.9m to 5.1m. At the same time, however, the dominance of the most popular
domains grew substantially. At the end of 2001, the top 10 websites
accounted for 31% of all the pages viewed on the net. By the end of last
year, the top 10 accounted for fully 40% of page views. There are more
destinations online, but we seem to be visiting fewer of them."


 [edit<http://p2pfoundation.net/Long_Tail?title=Long_Tail&action=edit&section=13>
]
Can an independent producer make money on the Long Tail

Jeff Bach from Quietwater Films :

"My reality as a content creator and producer is that it is basically not
possible for anyone in the "normal" realm to make a living in this Long Tail
space. I create and produce "paddlesports" content. Canoes and kayaks. I am
a provider of niche content. My customers are John and Jane Public and are
people who like outdoor recreation, especially the watery kind. Affluent,
active, with disposable income to spend on products like mine. They are
doing it as I had hoped.

But the reality at this time for me and my company is that I need to find
multiple large national distributors if I hope to even come close to making
a living at this game. And I need to produce fresh content on a reasonably
frequent basis. In short, I am a much smaller and more struggling version of
the giants that have preceded me. I have the same issues and problems my
predecessors did. The only thing that has changed is that I am trying to do
it with an awareness of Web 2.0 and Long Tail and several other "New Media"
phrases that you can insert here.

Your Long Tail theory is a basic and profound truth that I happily embrace
AS A CONSUMER. But as a producer and creator of Long Tail content it is
basically spelling out my doom. Other than your book examples which are
still basically about VERY LARGE entities and aggregators, I am finding very
few self supporting examples of independent Long Tail producers. I'm left
with a bad taste in my mouth as I see more and more that the "old school" of
thought, economy and media will continue to endure and dominate
until.......I don't know when, because I'm not seeing a change in the
economics of selling enough to support yourself." (
http://www.thelongtail.com/the_long_tail/2007/09/an-independent-.html)


On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Paul B. Hartzog <paulbhartzog at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Just a quick chime in here....
>
> Even if it is true that artists couldn't make a living in the
> industrial era infrastructure (or even if we just allow that it was
> harder), the economics of the long tail change everything.
>
> All that is required is to make enough money to sustain a practice and
> that has always meant simply reaching enough sources willing to funnel
> money to the artist.  This has been greatly facilitated by
> technologies of cooperation.  Most of the sustainable music on sites
> like Rhapsody is in the long tail.  The 'hits-based' curve is history.
>
> -paul
>
> On Feb 20, 2008 8:32 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Marco,
> >
> > Most our argument seems to boil down to getting rid of copyright, vs.
> > keeping it, and "myths" that you think people have or perceive about
> these
> > issues . I think all artists should *keep* copyright, even those
> releasing
> > under public domain, but within the terms of their copyright, declare
> how
> > they want copyright applied to their work.
> >
> > I don't really care if the above statement appears to addresses your
> issues
> > or arguments, or not. I think you should do some talking to artists, and
> > musicians who make a living from art/music, you may be surprised about
> their
> > attitudes.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You also wrote:
> >
> > "I'll just add to this that side jobs don't count in discussing these
> > issues. Sure, one can survive with a clerk or farming job, or even
> >  teaching guitar, literature or mathematics and play or write at
> > night."
> >
> > I survived for a couple of years solely off of revenue from being an
> > independent recording artist/touring musician. I know many others who
> have,
> > too.
> >
> > Still, I think you are wrong that saying that "side jobs don't even
> count in
> > discussing these issues". Maybe they do not count for you, but they sure
> as
> > hell count for me. There is absolutely no reason not to consider
> *anyone*
> > who is making money, and decisions about making money as an
> > artist/musician/creative, into the equation.
> >
> >
> > "But if this is the _only_ way to survive for an artist, if an artist
> > cannot be just an artist full time, with as little powerful patrons
> >  and intermediaries as possible... it isn't a good thing for society as
> > a whole, we haven't progressed all that much since the middle ages and
> > a reformed copyright continues to seem to me the most natural,
> >  effective and intrinsically right way to avoid these errors."
> >
> > The ways that you discuss are not the only ways to survive as an artist.
> My
> > father in law is a full time, fully self employed artist, and has been
> for
> > over 40 years. He has no rich patrons, yet makes a living from art.
> >
> > Here is one clue: For every self-employed, independent artist, there are
> at
> > least 3 times as many other independent self-employed people out there,
> who
> > are employed in other trades or fields, but can use artistic talents in
> > their work. There are huge markets for enterprising visual and audio
> > artists. They are not "get rich" markets, though, they are "make a
> living"
> > markets.
> >
> > Here is why I think you lack an understanding of how some artists and
> > musicians make a living (at least in the US, and in areas where I can
> speak
> > from actual experience): ***Most of the time, for independent artists
> who
> > make an actual living from art or music, total protection of works not
> come
> > into play as an important factor*** many of them could easily allow
> re-use
> > under certain conditions, and often benefit by way of re-use with
> > requirement attribution (giving credit to original source). This does
> not
> > mean that licensing is not also a factor, but the times when most
> > independent artists are able to charge multiple license charges from one
> > piece of work are often far less than the money they make from producing
> > unique works for individual paying clients.
> >
> >
> > So, an artist can release works, like photography, or creative images,
> under
> > a creative commons license that either totally lets people re-use for
> > commercial purposes (provided they give him attribution) or is allowed
> only
> > for non-commercial purposes. Usually, the work that the artist does is
> only
> > valuable to the one client who may have payed him to do it. And often,
> that
> > client, and the artist would benefit from allowing the copying and
> > redistribution of the image, which would aid publicity of both the
> artist
> > and the client. Usually the artists works are not stolen by some huge
> > corporation, as is often imagined.  If artists are worried about that,
> there
> > is something they can very easily do about it.
> >
> > That is artists. Musicians do make money, making music and licensing it
> to
> > record labels and radio stations. But, it's more nuanced than that.
> >
> > I'd like you to read, if you've already read, it, re-read
> > http://www.negativland.com/albini.html  and understand that most *really
> > successful* and popular musicians signed to a record label, working
> through
> > middle men as you suggest, walk away with peanuts, with the equivalent
> of a
> > convenience store worker's wages, after everyone gets their cut. This is
> the
> > reality of working through middle men in the music industry, as you
> suggest
> > at http://digifreedom.net/node/58
> >
> > So, musicians can actually stand to do better if they go it alone. But,
> they
> > lack infrastructure for publicity and distribution, and this is where
> > creative commons-style licenses can help, when musicians try to sell
> their
> > works online. Most independent musicians make the majority of their
> money by
> > way of touring, with some coming from selling recordings and
> merchandise.
> > When I toured in a band, people would record our shows, and trade them
> > online. This was fine with me, because it helped to promote our music,
> it
> > helped to take the place of the middle men who would have otherwise
> taken a
> > huge cut of the money we made from playing shows, selling merchandise,
> etc.
> >
> > Maybe over where you are at, people are actually arguing about no
> copyright
> > vs. copyright, but over here, many people have caught on to the idea of
> a
> > spectrum of rights, like those found in creative commons license. This
> lets
> > artists protect what they actually know their interests to be. Because,
> in
> > real practice, and in the emerging media ecology,  there are more ways
> to
> > make a living from creative works than just encircling them with
> copyright
> > and demanding that any and all users pay you.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2008 1:48 AM, M. Fioretti <marco.fioretti at eleutheros.it>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 10:02:06 AM +0700, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> > > > Hi Marco,
> > > >
> > > > perhaps you would be interested to join the p2p research list, which
> > > > is mostly, but not exclusively, academics and research oriented
> > > > people?
> > >
> > > Michel,
> > >
> > > It would be an honor for me to join discussion at such a level, even
> > > if just to sit quietly in a corner to listen and/or to play devil's
> > > advocate one or two times.
> > >
> > > This week I _must_ finish some other things first, so don't expect any
> > > reaction but this note before next Monday, but I will certainly come
> > > back with more questions and coments, either on the p2p research list
> > > or directly.
> > >
> > > Later,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >                Marco
> > > --
> > > Eleutheros:  www.eleutheros.it
> > >             A Catholic approach to Information Technology
> > >             Un approccio Cattolico all'Informatica
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Sam Rose
> > Social Synergy
> > Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
> > Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> > AIM: Str9960
> >  Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
> > skype: samuelrose
> > email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> > http://socialsynergyweb.com/services
> >  http://socialsynergy.typepad.com
> >
> > Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
> > OpenBusinessModels: http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
> >  http://p2pfoundation.net
> > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
> > http://www.cooperationcommons.com
> >  http://barcampbank.org
> > http://communitywiki.org
> > http://openfarmtech.org
> >
> >
> > Information Filtering:
> >  http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
> > http://del.icio.us/srose
> > http://twitter.com/SamRose
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2presearch mailing list
> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.PaulBHartzog.org
> http://www.panarchy.com
> PaulBHartzog at PaulBHartzog.org
> PaulBHartzog at panarchy.com
> PHartzog at umich.edu
> --------------------------------------------------------
> The Universe is made up of stories, not atoms.
>                 --Muriel Rukeyser
>
> See differently, then you will act differently.
>                  --Paul B. Hartzog
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>



-- 
The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
alternatives.

Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p

Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU

KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080221/6e7cc314/attachment-0001.html

More information about the p2presearch mailing list