3 ms·
artists have made more money via licensing than anything else. even indie bands nowadays can make bank if they license a song to a commercial or movie or what h
by reiyano 17y ago
artists have made more money via licensing than anything else. even indie bands nowadays can make bank if they license a song to a commercial or movie or what have you. In that respect copyright is a winner. I firmly believe that if someone wants to use your art to support their product in some way then the artist should be compensated. whether or not the artist gets to say yes or no to the licensing of his or her work is a whole other debate.
- thwarted 17y agoThat's true, but licensing in that sense has nothing to do with something being easy to copy, nor would keep artists who want to create from creating. Licensing for derivitive works should be legally seperate from the artifical restrictions placed on copying/access to an infinitely replicable resource. One has to do with getting credit for your work, the other doesn't; oddly, one of the reasons people share music or obtain it without paying for it is because it is authentic, there is no drive to get knockoff Beatles songs covered by someone else who claims to be the Beatles.