4 ms·

>If there's no money to be made in producing content, then nobody will produce content Sigh, how often have I heard this by now? It's a lie, and you know it. T

>If there's no money to be made in producing content, then nobody will produce content Sigh, how often have I heard this by now? It's a lie, and you know it. The only thing that will stop existing are the big content industries. >There needs to be some way to monetize the labor and time that goes into the production of art and entertainment. And where did I exclude that? I merely said that paid distribution of content is no longer a viable business model. Gatekeepers are no longer needed in a modern information society. Besides, I don't care about the copyright industry's profits and it enrages me that you think I should[1]. >IMO, anyone who claims that paid distribution needs to go away also bears the burden of proposing an alternative that makes rational business sense. Why should I need to propose an alternative? I'm stating a factual truth: the business model is obsolete, and trying to preserve it by force ultimately hurts everyone's rights and liberties. If the alternative is no alternative, then so be it. An analogy: If somebody would invent teleportation, it would not be his or her job to come up with new business models for the industries that produce or provide other means of transportation. And no, this is not an utopian scenario. It has happened hundreds, if not thousand times in the past. A new technology came along, making an older one obsolete, and possibly putting entire industries out of business[2]. Nobody complained. Until now - when the content industry is the first that thinks it's entitled to laws and regulation to safe their business model from rightly going the way of the dinosaur. [1] Shamelessly ripped off from http://torrentfreak.com/i-dont-care-about-your-profits-and-it-enrages-me-that-you-think-i-should-110911/ http://torrentfreak.com/i-dont-care-about-your-profits-and-i... [2] Another very nice essay by Rick Falkvinge, also on TF: http://torrentfreak.com/nobody-asked-for-a-refrigerator-fee-110821/ http://torrentfreak.com/nobody-asked-for-a-refrigerator-fee-...

danssig 15y ago
>It's a lie, and you know it. [citation needed] What is the "truth"? That e.g. artists will be fine because they can make more from concerts? Too bad about artists who make incredibly wonderful CDs but have no stage presence. I guess they don't deserve to be artists then. Or, wait, I know, they can buy t-shirts, stick their name on them and charge 50 times what they cost. People will buy them because they want the artist to keep producing! Do people not realize merchandise sales are just a form of charity? After all media is free, what are you going to do when people get sick of giving to this charity? >I don't care about the copyright industry's profits Here it sounds like you're talking about something different than I am. I don't care about the profits of obsolete middle men. I care about someone who's good at music, acting, writing, whatever being able to make a living from it. And not by depending on charity or throwing events.
- toyg 15y ago
  > Too bad about artists who make incredibly wonderful CDs but have no stage presence. I guess they don't deserve to be artists then. Too bad about those companies who make incredibly beautiful buggy-whips, but have no other income, I guess they don't deserve to be buggy-whip makers then! Either we embrace the capitalism-fuelled race to productivity enhancement or we don't, but I fail to see why a minority of the population is entitled to lifetime (and even posthumous) subsidies because they refuse to show themselves in public, while the remaining 90% is not. > I don't care about the profits of obsolete middle men. I care about someone who's good at music, acting, writing Then how can you defend a system that was written by and for these obsolete middle-men? A system that sees the overwhelming majority of arts-related profits going to middlemen, while artists starve ? For each billion dollars in the entertainment industry, only a few millions go to a few selected, market-friendly artists, and that's obscene.

danssig 15y ago

>It's a lie, and you know it. [citation needed] What is the "truth"? That e.g. artists will be fine because they can make more from concerts? Too bad about artists who make incredibly wonderful CDs but have no stage presence. I guess they don't deserve to be artists then. Or, wait, I know, they can buy t-shirts, stick their name on them and charge 50 times what they cost. People will buy them because they want the artist to keep producing! Do people not realize merchandise sales are just a form of charity? After all media is free, what are you going to do when people get sick of giving to this charity? >I don't care about the copyright industry's profits Here it sounds like you're talking about something different than I am. I don't care about the profits of obsolete middle men. I care about someone who's good at music, acting, writing, whatever being able to make a living from it. And not by depending on charity or throwing events.

toyg 15y ago
> Too bad about artists who make incredibly wonderful CDs but have no stage presence. I guess they don't deserve to be artists then. Too bad about those companies who make incredibly beautiful buggy-whips, but have no other income, I guess they don't deserve to be buggy-whip makers then! Either we embrace the capitalism-fuelled race to productivity enhancement or we don't, but I fail to see why a minority of the population is entitled to lifetime (and even posthumous) subsidies because they refuse to show themselves in public, while the remaining 90% is not. > I don't care about the profits of obsolete middle men. I care about someone who's good at music, acting, writing Then how can you defend a system that was written by and for these obsolete middle-men? A system that sees the overwhelming majority of arts-related profits going to middlemen, while artists starve ? For each billion dollars in the entertainment industry, only a few millions go to a few selected, market-friendly artists, and that's obscene.