From: Max M (maxmcorp@worldonline.dk)
Date: Wed Nov 27 2002 - 05:32:31 MST
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Well, you can do both. All I'm saying that you can do great art if you're
> in it for art's sake, and have a dayjob to pay for it. It sure makes some
> things Hollywood does now impossible (but then, no one has nuked Hollywood
> with P2P yet), and it kills the high-$$$ glamour around it. Does it kill
> the movie as we know it? Hell, no.
I don't see any reason why we should not have both. People go see those
big production movies. So clearly there is a good enough reason to make
them.
What I don't like is the idea that hollywood should be nuked by pirated
versions of their content on p2p networks. Generally I believe copyright
and patents to be the right way to go. Although I am VERY open to debate
about the timeframe, and the way in which patents are granted ;-)
But I also like the idea of web based distribution of art. And in fact
in theory there is nothing stopping anybody from doing it today.
Right now there is a very frustrating situation though, where people
releasing their art through the web are not taken seriously by anybody.
Making it very difficult to do it in practice.
We have yet to hear of any major artist breaking through via the net.
Even though the technology has been available for years now.
I believe we are in a kind of "chicken and egg" scenario now.
But when net based distribution becomes common it will probably be
possible to beat Hollywood and TV on quality content.
regards Max M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:26 MST