Re: Stallman calls for an end to file sharing war

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss Zoolook <mr.zoolook@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 07:41, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> In gnu.misc.discuss Ben Pfaff<blp@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>> I don't download music or films (legally or illegally).  Why should I
>>> pay such a fee?

>> To support your country's musicians and film makers.  It might seem a
>> bit (or even a lot) unfair, but it's not all that much money.  Would
>> you rather that general taxes be used to support them (as others have
>> suggested), or that the current "system" continue as it is?

> Isn't the right way to support the artists to BUY it...

It's one right way, but not the only one.  Artists who perform on radio
or television don't get paid individually by each person
listening/watching.

> .... thats like saying anyone who lives in (for example) China, should
> pay a fee to (for example) the furniture industry (which China are a
> pretty major player) even if they live in the middle of nowhere with
> nothing but the same table and chairs for the last 20 years!

No, it's not like your furniture thing, which is a strawman.  Furniture
can not be reproduced at near zero cost whereas films and music can.
Maybe in the distant future, there will be a machine which can analyze an
arbitrary physical object and reproduce it from cheap raw materials, but
until that happens furniture will be essentially different from music.

> Its a totally ridiculous way to fund an industry!

Well, feel free to suggest an alternative.  The difficulty seems to be
coming up with a way to collect payments which is as easy as downloading
music.  Downloading isn't going to stop any time soon.  Paying for
downloading by the item seems to be too difficult to arrange.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).