Exploring the Right to Share, Mix and Burn

RewiredRewired Member
edited April 2005 in Science & Tech
The other side of the peer-to-peer file sharing debacle...

View: Exploring the Right to Share, Mix and Burn - New York Times
Mr. Lessig said that "the freedom to remix, not just words, but culture" was critical in the development of unforeseen works of art. He pointed to "The Grey Album," produced by the D.J. Danger Mouse, a remix of the Beatles' "White Album" and Jay-Z's "Black Album" that resulted in a wholly new and unexpected piece of music.

"What does it say about our democracy when ordinary behavior is deemed criminal?" he asked. Mr. Lessig and the moderator, Steven Johnson, a contributing editor at Wired, made much of the fact that the discussion was taking place in a library, where much of the Western cultural canon is available free.
Source: New York Times

Comments

  • RewiredRewired Member
    edited April 2005
    This is an important article to read because the public has to understand the musician’s perspective of peer-to-peer music trading. Downloading music is not the crime that big business would have you believe. As a musician I feel it helps the community by creating a buzz. Conclusion: Big business (the corporation) sucks!
  • Camtin
    edited April 2005
    What about the little people involved in the music industry? The individual sound engineers, artists, factory workers, technicians, and photographers? And not to mention small labels owned and supported by larger big name parent corporations? When companies noticed that 70% of their profits are missing- these are the people that lose their jobs first.

    The people you hurt by your criminal actions are not men with ties and suitcases as the suburban college hippy would have you believe.
  • RewiredRewired Member
    edited April 2005
    Those are some powerful words spoken by a guy who's running a bootleg version of Windows. I know this guy he's busting my chops.
  • camtin
    edited April 2005
    I’m just playing devil’s advocate here- but that doesn’t mean you have to dismiss it as folly. There is an element of honesty in my words though - I commit crimes, but I don’t fool myself, I know they are still crimes.
  • RewiredRewired Member
    edited April 2005
    You are very arrogant in imply that I'm fooling myself. Did you even read the article?
  • camtin
    edited April 2005
    Downloading music is not the crime that big business would have you believe
    Sounds like you don't think it's a crime.

    Yea, I read it...
    It is a curious sight when a rock star appears before his flock and suggests they take his work without paying for it, and even encourages them to.
    Why ruin it for all the rockers who wish to make money on music then?
    the standard rock equation: no record/no tour, no tour/no money, no money/no band.
    Sounds like something that countless bands go through, and not many rebound from.

    I think DJ Danger Mouse should be paying royalties to the people that own the rights to JayZ's and the Beatles' tunes... and he should be paying Hanna Barbara for the use of the name 'Danger Mouse'.

    Without copyright laws, innovation comes to a standstill, this is basic text book capitalism. Look it up. While expectations will always be there- the truth of the matter is that the free download of music hurts the music itself.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited April 2005
    I have several CDs that I never would've purchased if I hadn't pirated one or two tracks first.
  • camtin
    edited April 2005
    I definitely understand that logic- ive bought sausage after sampling it. The music industry does a good job already at giving us samples of music- with videos , radio shows, cd singles, and web downloads. I don’t know if it needs to be pirated… and if a company wants to use sampling as a marketing technique, it’s for them to decide.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited April 2005
    The problem is, the recording industry only samples the best track on the album. That does not, and never really has, given you an accurate representation of the album.
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited April 2005
    Agreed. And anything you hear on the radio/MTV, etc, doesn't pay. Those artists do not need more money. It's the independent ones who do. I listen to almost all indie, and ever since I've gotten into it, I've boughten way more CDs than ever before. Even though I have the full version at a very high-quality bitrate. I just like to support the artists I enjoy.

    Oh, and yeah, the numbers the RIAA toss out are complete bullsh*t. Actual sales have gone down, but they don't take into account the a) lifespan of the CD is wearing out with the Internet coming around, b) there was a SEVEN PERCENT increase in CD costs in the last year or two, which is huge. Basic sense says that if they keep charging more, less people will buy it. So while sales have dropped a tad, the revenue has not, due to the increase in prices.

    I'm actually writing an 8-page precis on this right now for English, so I've done a bit of research. Great link: http://www.bricklin.com/recordsales.htm
Sign In or Register to comment.