3 ms·
> Compared to a private corporation profiting from the situation and dictating what music will/won't be available tomorrow In a publicly funded version of this
by throwaway316943 5y ago
> Compared to a private corporation profiting from the situation and dictating what music will/won't be available tomorrow
In a publicly funded version of this you just have the government deciding what will and won’t be available. Look at the existing cultural departments of national governments, they’re full of arbitrary decisions made by bureaucrats. At least with the current model, if someone comes up with a better way to get paid while giving artists and consumers a better deal they’ve got a chance of displacing the existing model, when you legislate something into existence it’s nearly impossible to renovate it.
- southerntofu 5y ago> you just have the government deciding what will and won’t be available That's not how Bittorrent works, fortunately, but i see your point. I'm not a fan of government either. I stand for the abolition of government and copyright at the same time (among other things). I'm merely pointing out that alternative proposals do exist (most people are not aware) and it's really disgusting that a private company is making business out of people trying to access culture... and gets to decide what albums to remove at what time. > if someone comes up with a better way to get paid while giving artists and consumers a better deal they’ve got a chance of displacing the existing model That's not how monopoly works. In a capitalist economy, you basically need a billion euros (or at least 1% of that) on the table before you can try and maybe change something. Otherwise, other companies will not even start talks for a contract with you. See copyright mafia, telecoms/ISP mafia, large retailers mafia, social netowrks / advertisement mafia, etc... Hell, even for running a simple mail server it's so hard to reach gmail.com or outlook.com users ;)