4 ms·
> How can we stand for this? Because, in a single concept, these are nonrival goods. We would want there to be excess value created over what they cost to prod
by hxa7241 14y ago
> How can we stand for this?
Because, in a single concept, these are nonrival goods. We would want there to be excess value created over what they cost to produce.
All we need to do is cover the costs of sufficient production. But then we should use the produce freely as much as we want. Because that way we all gain.
If musicians (etc.), overall, are unable to afford to produce, so everyone is, in general, short of music, then we need to address the matter somehow. But the article did not seem to prove that problem actually existed.
- tptacek 14y agoYou wrote: If musicians (etc.), overall, are unable to afford to produce, so everyone is, in general, short of music, then we need to address the matter somehow. But the article did not seem to prove that problem actually existed. I fix: Musicians (etc.), overall, are unable to afford to produce, so everyone will soon be, in general, short of music, so we need to address the matter somehow. You said: But the article did not seem to prove that problem actually existed. The article went into great detail about how: * Revenue to musicians is down industrywide over 60% * The economic models that supposedly offset the decline in recording revenues are counterfeit, in that they were present before the drop in revenue, never accounted for the majority of most musician's revenue, and in many cases are equally susceptible to piracy. Specifically: this article states that bands earn less than $200/night for playing concerts. * The studies that suggest the contrary are misleading, use cherry picked examples, and even in those cases discuss professionals earning less than managers at fast food chains. * After a very brief period of opportunity for direct sales revenue on the Internet, musicians (not labels, musicians) got squeezed out of the picture by Facebook and Google - specifically: their audience has been captured by Youtube and Facebook and with it their opportunity to build customer relationships and conduct financial transactions with them. * He knows professional musicians who are living out of their vans and eating out of dumpsters. I'm trying to figure out how that last sentence of yours could not be willfully obtuse. The only explanation I can come up with is that you think he's baldly lying.
- hxa7241 14y agoBecause whether various people think they are being paid as much as they should, and how much is actually being produced, are different things. If you are asking for special provisions from the public, prove the public gets a good deal. How much should the public give? Simply as much as you say? No, that does not work. The public cares about the end result: how much is produced (and available). That is the point. There has been significant -- or to some, rampant -- 'piracy', and huge 'losses', for a decade: that is what we have been told. But where is the devestation to the amount of production? Where is the terrible shortage of new music being made? That does not seem to be happening. > everyone will soon be, in general, short of music So, you admit it has not happened, and is not currently happening. You will forgive people for being cautious about claims from the general direction of the music industry, and instead expecting good evidence. Everyone likes music, but we should not be giving away money simply because someone else says they should get it.
- tptacek 14y agoNone of this responds to my comment.