3 ms·

I appreciate such a thoughtful summary of recent history from a position I completely disagree with. I think the $50 is really just $50. There was never a time

by ewzimm 12y ago

I appreciate such a thoughtful summary of recent history from a position I completely disagree with. I think the $50 is really just $50. There was never a time when regular writers and musicians had significant economic power, and getting people to buy albums and magazine subscriptions won't give it to them. That's not to say that art can't be powerful, it just historically has found its power in affecting the thinking of people who do have economic and political power. At a time when it can be difficult to see a long-term strategy for getting paid for creative work, I think we have an opportunity to come up with better models for creative people than exploitative contracts with publishers.

bzg 12y ago
"I think we have an opportunity to come up with better models for creative people than exploitative contracts with publishers." Agreed. Maybe I'm extrapolating, but I think there is the same need for creative people who build free softwares today.
- ewzimm 12y ago
  Free software definitely needs creative people. Finding artists and designers is one of the biggest issues for most free software projects. Programmers have found creative ways to get paid by adding things like small consultant fees to lots of companies that use their work, so maybe artists should look to similar models. I bet a lot of people would pay to keep their software pretty.
fennecfoxen 12y ago
I'd agree with the basic sentiment, but would like to add that n+1's long-term strategy idea of "perhaps we could create and strengthen a union" is a think-inside-the-box 19th-century solution to a 21st-century problem... and probably won't work.
- ewzimm 12y ago
  I took the ambiguity of that statement as acknowledgement of what I'm saying, that just getting paid by traditional contracts is not the end-game for artists. They need to find a way to collectively work toward common goals outside of their employer's intentions for them.

by ewzimm 12y ago

bzg 12y ago

"I think we have an opportunity to come up with better models for creative people than exploitative contracts with publishers." Agreed. Maybe I'm extrapolating, but I think there is the same need for creative people who build free softwares today.

ewzimm 12y ago
Free software definitely needs creative people. Finding artists and designers is one of the biggest issues for most free software projects. Programmers have found creative ways to get paid by adding things like small consultant fees to lots of companies that use their work, so maybe artists should look to similar models. I bet a lot of people would pay to keep their software pretty.

fennecfoxen 12y ago

I'd agree with the basic sentiment, but would like to add that n+1's long-term strategy idea of "perhaps we could create and strengthen a union" is a think-inside-the-box 19th-century solution to a 21st-century problem... and probably won't work.

ewzimm 12y ago
I took the ambiguity of that statement as acknowledgement of what I'm saying, that just getting paid by traditional contracts is not the end-game for artists. They need to find a way to collectively work toward common goals outside of their employer's intentions for them.