Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: fallacies

Author:Jacob Levy
Posted:7/12/2000; 9:57:39 AM
Topic:scriptingNews outline for 7/12/2000
Msg #:18486 (In response to 18481)
Prev/Next:18485 / 18487

David Brown write:

If that were true, then it would have already happened.

OK so this is a fallacy, maybe. So what.

The point is why *shouldn't* musicians be paid? After all, they did create the work and did all the sweat, heavy lifting and so forth to produce the art. I say they should be paid. I don't want to prey on them and use their hard love labor for free.

There's a huge disconnect here: how can I pay Lars Ulrich (yes, even Metallica), John Lee Hooker, BB King, Aretha Franklin, Elvis Presley, the Byrds and a zillion others for the music I like to listen to? The problem right now is that RIAA is one of the major roadblocks in realizing the ability to pay musicians (and members companies of RIAA for that matter). Instead of focusing on calling us, their clients, the consumer, names like "pirate" and "thief" and funding phony soundbite campaigns, if they invested some money in the technology needed to make it possible to pay for what you use, well, then things would be different.

The internet is very good for routing around any damage. Brain damage included. :) If the RIAA won't play then I'm sure others will jump in and treat this as the huge opportunity it is. The RIAA would do well to remember that there is no such thing as a monopoly on the 'net. It only takes one major name artist to join the revolutionaries to show the world what the new order of things is. Courtney Love, even though I like her, is still too small a fry.

Where is our line-crosser? :) C'mon, we only need one...

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:55:38 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.