Re: Stallman calls for an end to file sharing war

[Zoolook]

On 08/10/2010 20:22, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> In gnu.misc.discuss Zoolook<mr.zoolook@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > 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.

My mistake, I should have said PAY FOR it, rather then BUY it... Over 
here, we have a thing called the TV license, effectively, a tax on 
watching television.  Each individual pays a subscription THAT 
THEORETICALLY the broadcasting companies use the income from to produce 
(or license from other production companies) the broadcasts they put 
out.  So anyone listening or watching a performer HAS paid them!  Just 
not directly.  Crucially, anybody listening to or watching a different 
broadcast has ALSO paid for them.  If the artists do not receive the 
money owed them, that is the fault of the broadcasting/production 
company, NOT the person enjoying the broadcast!

> > .... 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.

Where I live, the electricity used in copying/downloading/streaming 
costs money, as does the medium I finally store it onto... that's 
decidedly LESS free then the virtually never ending supply of 
wood/cotton used to make furniture.

> > Its a totally ridiculous way to fund an industry!
>
> Well, feel free to suggest an alternative.

Here's one, costing people NOT wanting the products no extra surcharge.

Offer incentives to download from authorised on-line stores (even 
preview weekends to try before you buy).  I have bought more over steam 
then I ever bought in high-street... its convenient, easy, I don't have 
to spend money going there only to find the store has sold out... 9/10 
times its cheaper... They have trial periods on the full products so you 
KNOW what your buying instead of relying on paid (easily bribed) reviewers.

On-line stores also have an advantage to offer promoting up and coming 
artists since the relative cost of hosting an album of (even free) mp3 
tracks is little league compared to a TV/radio/roadside campaign... far 
more attractive to a record label.

Oh hang on... this is already being done isn't it!  DAMN!  I guess now 
anyone wanting to support the artists CAN pay for it now!  Shocker!

> 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.

Paying for downloading by the item seems too difficult to arrange? 
Where did the £250 odd I spent over the last month through steam go 
then?  Thin air?  Your talking rubbish now...

However, something that might help is if you were told the truth about 
the music/film/whatever being the best thing in the world ever... its 
not... I was lied to in January about it being this years summer
block-buster... its crap but I have just forked out money that I can't 
claim back off you cos the product (or cinema ticket) is used... what 
possible incentive is there now for me to buy a product off you next 
time?  Fuck that, I am just gonna download it!

--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.