Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Music, Rights and Industry
Author: Karl Dubost Posted: 8/2/2000; 2:05:29 AM Topic: Music, Rights and Industry Msg #: 19375 Prev/Next: 19374 / 19376
Just a starting comment: I don't use Napster, or any mp3 files, more by respect for the bandwidth than the music industry. This is an old idea from my first use of Internet, ten years ago. I know it's silly.
This is not only a problem of music. It's a problem of Art and their producers. The Napster problem or others domains problems at that time on Internet are caused by the industry and not by the Artists. In this debate, we're confusing art and mechanization, Industrialization.
Art became a product and was not any more an art work. In the ancient times until 100-150 years, the artist was poor or payed by a philantropic patron, a rich man who likes paintings, musics, poetry or whatever. The artist was only living for his art and that's all!
The industry came and the reproducibility of a work has born. What an idea, we make this work available for many people (democratization) and we will develop an industry around it. So, do we need to sell the products at the manufacturing cost plus benefits to continue to develop the industry, or do we need to give money to the artists for the reproductions...
So the rights came! I don't have the answer but I'm not satisfied by the economic model of right. Is the reproduction of the work always Art? We don't speak about concert for Music or an original painting, but about reproductions... In Europe, there are two rights: "owner right" (droit patrimonial in french) and the moral right. The "owner right" is the right to have money for the reproduction of works, the work becomes public domain 70 years after the death of the author. But the moral right never expires, it's the right for the author or his family or artwork owners to stop the missuses of an artwork (imagine a political use with a deformation of the artist view).
Copyrights are not democracy. I will be very interested to have the ratio of artits that really make money with their artwork. The music industry, the book industry, etc. is flourishing but the artists???
If you take musicians. How many people could live from their artwork? Stephen King or Rolling Stones will never have problem to sell their artwork, they are part of the industry, but when you sell a book at 1000 units...
A friend of mine wrote a book on Email in France. "http://search.alapage.com/cgi-bin/1/affiche_livre.cgi?l_isbn=2100029274">Email Sur l'internet" - Stephane Le Solliec.
The price is around 100FF. He wins 9FF from the editor for each sold book. And the first year, bookshops sold around 1000 units...
So it gives => 9000FF (1300 $US)
You can't live with it. So, Napster is not a problem for artists but a problem for the "Art industry".
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:55:57 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.