From Kent Williams Sent Fri, Apr 16th 1999, 16:13
From Kent Williams Sent Fri, Apr 16th 1999, 16:13
I would tend to come down on the side of Warp when it comes to shutting down MP3 sites. It pisses me off in general when people want something for nothing. Why do people think it's so cool to get over on someone? I guess the attitude is that if you aren't actively screwing someone, you must somehow be getting screwed yourself. But it isn't a zero sum game -- when the artists win, the audience wins; when the artists lose, the audience loses. My philosophy can be called 'cooperativism.' If you want something, expect to give something in return. I don't see what an mp3-geek gives to the artists and record company in return for the music they're getting -- unless they actually pay for the music. If they don't pay, and get a charge out of not paying, then they're just as pathetic as the jerks who get excited about getting surplus government cheese when they don't need it. What MP3 technology points to is a system where the physical artifact of the CD is no longer an essential part of the transaction. But if the transaction is one way -- people get music, but never put money back in the system to support the artists and the companies who package the music -- then there is little economic incentive for people to start labels or make music. The artists lose and the audience loses. What it boils down to is this: if the producers don't get paid, they have to support themselves with day jobs. I work a day job to pay the bills and produce music when I can steal the time from my family. I can tell you uniquivocably that I'm not making music of the quality and quantity that I could make if I could pursue it full time. This is not to say that there aren't different economic models that are viable for producers to make a living. Conceivably, you could give away MP3s and make your living off of personal appearances, merchandising, and selling CDs for offline consumption. This is the model that Chuck D and Public Enemy are pursuing. But it will be a while before this model can really be viable -- an artist would need to have a fan base around the world that would come out to a show a couple times a year faithfully, something that is very difficult to generate these days without the revenues from CD sales. I don't have much sympathy for the Sonys and Warners of the world -- they make a huge fortune by delivering overpriced products to the public, while paying artists as little money as possible to produce it. The audience and artists should be working towards cutting those leeches out of the loop. But when the audience comes to expect something for nothing, then they're making it harder than it already is for the artists to make a decent living. Ideally, an artist and his or her audience are engaging in a dialog that is both a human communication and an economic transaction. kent williams -- xxxx@xxxxxx.xxx ICQ:33001909