Ignore the money.AllNightDayDream wrote:I respect music and value it deeply, but real value to me doesn't include $$$(Pada) wrote:I think the lack of respect for music that this culture has created is just as bad as the financial losses.
Kids these days don't seem to value apiece of music at all, they just want everything instantly.
Shit how did I get this bitter by 18 hahaha
Pedro Sánchez wrote:^
exactly. everything is free, and fuck you if you tell me different. i don't think people know the repercussions that this kind of generational thinking will have for anyone that wants to pursue a career in the arts.(Pada) wrote:Ignore the money.AllNightDayDream wrote:I respect music and value it deeply, but real value to me doesn't include $$$(Pada) wrote:I think the lack of respect for music that this culture has created is just as bad as the financial losses.
Kids these days don't seem to value apiece of music at all, they just want everything instantly.
Shit how did I get this bitter by 18 hahaha
you totally misread what I put.
People want EVERYTHING, NOW.
Instead of valuing what they do have
@pada: I kind of see what your saying? not really though, you're arguement is'nt too strong here.seckle wrote:exactly. everything is free, and fuck you if you tell me different. i don't think people know the repercussions that this kind of generational thinking will have for anyone that wants to pursue a career in the arts.(Pada) wrote:Ignore the money.AllNightDayDream wrote:I respect music and value it deeply, but real value to me doesn't include $$$(Pada) wrote:I think the lack of respect for music that this culture has created is just as bad as the financial losses.
Kids these days don't seem to value apiece of music at all, they just want everything instantly.
Shit how did I get this bitter by 18 hahaha
you totally misread what I put.
People want EVERYTHING, NOW.
Instead of valuing what they do have
It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything). Maybe the capitalist paradigm of 'giving the consumer what they want' would actually fall apart if everyone realised they don't want what all these random unnecessary things that are constantly flashed at them all day, music included. It has only been in the past 100 years or so that people stopped getting together to make their own music, like singing around the family piano, and this has coincided with the rise of the music industry.Mr Hyde wrote:I don't nesecerrily think musicians are owed any sort of living, if the pirated version is exactly the same as the non pirated version then they need to step up their game and offer something different. Whatever that is- live shows/DJing, merchandise, collectable formats, higher quality digital formats etc.
Hahaha don't even get me started on capitalism, thats a whole another topic i can rant and rant about for hours on its evils and how its completely failed to benefit anyone except rich, greedy, CEO's and corrupt politicians.test recordings wrote:It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything). Maybe the capitalist paradigm of 'giving the consumer what they want' would actually fall apart if everyone realised they don't want what all these random unnecessary things that are constantly flashed at them all day, music included. It has only been in the past 100 years or so that people stopped getting together to make their own music, like singing around the family piano, and this has coincided with the rise of the music industry.Mr Hyde wrote:I don't nesecerrily think musicians are owed any sort of living, if the pirated version is exactly the same as the non pirated version then they need to step up their game and offer something different. Whatever that is- live shows/DJing, merchandise, collectable formats, higher quality digital formats etc.
Making music is ubiquitous for humans, it's only really western Europeans and their descendants that don't make a social activity out of unlike other cultures where it's still a part of everyday life and social cohesion. For instance, my mate who's working in Nigeria said all the Africans in his workshop get together and have a sing-song before work in the morning before work and this is pretty standard for traditional cultures across the world judging from anthropological data. From this then, maybe music isn't actually worth any money since people can do it themselves and have just as much enjoyment out of it therefore meaning the whole 'business' of music a commodification of traditional human activities?
look at the assange thing. his claim from day one is that he was the "conduit" of information. the pipe for it, as you could say. he claims that he didn't know who sent him info and who downloaded it. he had no regard for whether the information he was receiving/re-transmitting was "property". he took it upon himself to in effect publish what he liked. a brazen and selfish decision.test recordings wrote:It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything).
seckle wrote:look at the assange thing. his claim from day one is that he was the "conduit" of information. the pipe for it, as you could say. he claims that he didn't know who sent him info and who downloaded it. he had no regard for whether the information he was receiving/re-transmitting was "property". he took it upon himself to in effect publish what he liked. a brazen and selfish decision.test recordings wrote:It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything).
he, like all filesharers, have this fantasy land notion that 1's and 0's floating around in cyberspace, are somehow theirs due to free access. its like being on a train, and finding a wallet. trains are public access and people are travelling in the same tunnels, but because a wallet is tangible, "hold in your hands" property, most people would do the right thing and return it, or try to contact the owner. there's a guilt decision involved. but hey you know what.....some music that someone has spent dozens of hours labouring over, who might be struggling to make rent or feed his wife or kids, has paid to have his music professionally mastered, and if lucky has found a label...well fuck that guy and his family. i won't pay him a dime because i feel big and empowered by my internet connection.
how anyone can argue in justification for ^that bullshit is beyond me.
i deleted my illegal library and started buying it all back like a year ago.seckle wrote:look at the assange thing. his claim from day one is that he was the "conduit" of information. the pipe for it, as you could say. he claims that he didn't know who sent him info and who downloaded it. he had no regard for whether the information he was receiving/re-transmitting was "property". he took it upon himself to in effect publish what he liked. a brazen and selfish decision.test recordings wrote:It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything).
he, like all filesharers, have this fantasy land notion that 1's and 0's floating around in cyberspace, are somehow theirs due to free access. its like being on a train, and finding a wallet. trains are public access and people are travelling in the same tunnels, but because a wallet is tangible, "hold in your hands" property, most people would do the right thing and return it, or try to contact the owner. there's a guilt decision involved. but hey you know what.....some music that someone has spent dozens of hours labouring over, who might be struggling to make rent or feed his wife or kids, has paid to have his music professionally mastered, and if lucky has found a label...well fuck that guy and his family. i won't pay him a dime because i feel big and empowered by my internet connection.
how anyone can argue in justification for ^that bullshit is beyond me.
?seckle wrote:attack on creativity
I imagine prosecuting file sharers is also done by legal teams not the original artists.deadly habit wrote:clearing samples is generally at the hands of a major labels legal team and not the original artists, and i wouldn't call most lawyers artistically minded
incnic wrote:DMZ forthingcoming In McDonalds (Swamp81 w/ MC Boodiker)
Exactly why I think that uncleared samples can only really result in greater creativity.deadly habit wrote:clearing samples is generally at the hands of a major labels legal team and not the original artists, and i wouldn't call most lawyers artistically minded
Correct in both cases, fucking lawyers.kentnz wrote:I imagine prosecuting file sharers is also done by legal teams not the original artists.deadly habit wrote:clearing samples is generally at the hands of a major labels legal team and not the original artists, and i wouldn't call most lawyers artistically minded
if the original artists had to deal with file sharers it would become a full time job, where as a couple of people looking to clear a sample could be covered via email (unless you're the winstons)kentnz wrote:I imagine prosecuting file sharers is also done by legal teams not the original artists.deadly habit wrote:clearing samples is generally at the hands of a major labels legal team and not the original artists, and i wouldn't call most lawyers artistically minded
The real question is whether the pirates in question would have paid for the music if they weren't able to pirate it.seckle wrote:look at the assange thing. his claim from day one is that he was the "conduit" of information. the pipe for it, as you could say. he claims that he didn't know who sent him info and who downloaded it. he had no regard for whether the information he was receiving/re-transmitting was "property". he took it upon himself to in effect publish what he liked. a brazen and selfish decision.test recordings wrote:It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything).
he, like all filesharers, have this fantasy land notion that 1's and 0's floating around in cyberspace, are somehow theirs due to free access. its like being on a train, and finding a wallet. trains are public access and people are travelling in the same tunnels, but because a wallet is tangible, "hold in your hands" property, most people would do the right thing and return it, or try to contact the owner. there's a guilt decision involved. but hey you know what.....some music that someone has spent dozens of hours labouring over, who might be struggling to make rent or feed his wife or kids, has paid to have his music professionally mastered, and if lucky has found a label...well fuck that guy and his family. i won't pay him a dime because i feel big and empowered by my internet connection.
how anyone can argue in justification for ^that bullshit is beyond me.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
