Copyright vs Copywrong

For the discussion of Movies, Television, Comics, and other existential distractions.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Steve Barber
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:02 am
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Steve Barber » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:58 pm

FinderDoug wrote:
Shameful, one sided debate on this while I was out of the cosmos.
What's shameful is that you think debate should cease just because you're not around.


Um. This is one of those occasions in which I am dead certain Frank was writing with his tongue in cheek and was misunderstood as being self-obsessed.

FinderDoug wrote:All of which illustrates that while a couple million people grasp the clear-as-day concept of buying your music and directly supporting the artist - which has worked for a century now - there are another 18,000+ who are thieving dirtbags.


This hits my core point, which is that the methodology for ensuring artistic compensation is an existing system of a proven track record. But now because things can be freely stolen, the folks who want free stuff want to legitimize their greed.

FinderDoug wrote:Frank may say, "Who cares? 18,000 copies is less than 1% of the total units sold in the first two weeks." Those 18,000 units also represent $234,000 value in stolen goods.


Exactly. Death by a thousand cuts.

FinderDoug wrote:And that's the silliest thing in all of this: that 18,000 people would risk having to pay a minimum fine of $750 for a $13 album. It's hard to have sympathy for that level of stupidity.


If only we could nail them. Of course, Frank is convinced we're trying to sentence them all to jail when we applaud the arrest of felons like Kim Dotcom, which is wholly off the mark.

We want them to pay for the work. That's it.

Compensate the artist. Period.
All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby FrankChurch » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:06 pm

You mean compensate certain artists. Some artists will make almost zero money while others will swim in millions. A government supported funding plan would help more artists equally.

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Fri Nov 14, 2014 2:27 pm

FrankChurch wrote:You mean compensate certain artists. Some artists will make almost zero money while others will swim in millions. A government supported funding plan would help more artists equally.


Hey, Frank---if nobody buys your book or wants your music, why should you get any of their money? Some artists---or should I say "artists"---simply don't attract an audience. Are you saying that no matter what kind of schlock somebody throws together and claims is "art" should merit compensation?

For those artists who are legitimate and often good who are underpaid, that is a problem with the DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, not copyright.

But you seem to be claiming that all art or attempts at art are equal and should be equally compensated....? Do I understand that correctly?

User avatar
FinderDoug
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby FinderDoug » Fri Nov 14, 2014 5:46 pm

Um. This is one of those occasions in which I am dead certain Frank was writing with his tongue in cheek and was misunderstood as being self-obsessed.
I suppose that's possible. I've also been on the pointy end historically of enough of his comments suggesting that I couldn't possibly be as smart as his 'experts', that he's so much more 'in the mainstream' than anyone else, and that my reasoned and rational responses to him - which he never bothers to respond to in a meaningful way - are 'loopy' that it might also be easy to see how he's built a persona for himself that may color how he's perceived by some people.

But in the final analysis, nie moj cyrk, nie moje malpy.

User avatar
Steve Barber
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:02 am
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Steve Barber » Sat Nov 15, 2014 6:58 am

FrankChurch wrote:You mean compensate certain artists. Some artists will make almost zero money while others will swim in millions. A government supported funding plan would help more artists equally.


No. Compensate the artist you appreciate. Buy their stuff; don't steal it. Let "the market" work out who makes zilch and who makes millions. Government funding adds a whole new layer, plus means artists will have to "submit" their works to some sort of agency -- a step that could leads to government controlled artistic output.

Aka Censorship.
All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Lori Koonce » Sat Nov 15, 2014 12:22 pm

FrankChurch wrote:You mean compensate certain artists. Some artists will make almost zero money while others will swim in millions. A government supported funding plan would help more artists equally.



Frank

Why should all artists be paid the same? Holland has a payment system for the arts like you mention and they also have where houses full of art that no one wants. Mark has written dozens of books, why should I get paid the same amount he does?

Besides, WFELF dose payment have to do with copyright anyways...

User avatar
AndrewR
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby AndrewR » Sun Nov 16, 2014 12:24 pm

FrankChurch wrote:You mean compensate certain artists. Some artists will make almost zero money while others will swim in millions. A government supported funding plan would help more artists equally.


Except that compensation is only a portion of the copyright equation. The biggest issue is control. Who controls my work? If the answer isn't Me then what's the point? Why would I want to share knowing that I don't get to control the art that I create? Communal ownership is fine for ants and naked mole rats, not so much for humanity.
Andrew Rogers

"Anything more than 500 yds from the car just isn't photogenic." - Brett Weston

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Ezra Lb. » Sun Nov 16, 2014 7:01 pm

In an ideal world there would be direct relationship between artistic success and commercial success. But it just doesn't work that way. As far as I can tell there is no relationship whatsoever. There have been great artists who were commercially successful and great artists who virtually starved. And of course there has been utter crap that sold like hotcakes.

If we want a system of public funding of the arts the way to go is to subsidize music education and arts programs in our schools. People have to be trained to appreciate the best work. Unfortunately the folks who think that commercial success equals artistic success are the ones who control the purse strings and they detest public financing of anything except wars.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby FrankChurch » Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:56 am

Ezra is on point. Woo Ezra.

The WPA used to fund plays. Do that too.

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Rick Keeney » Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:00 am

Ezra Lb. wrote:In an ideal world there would be direct relationship between artistic success and commercial success. But it just doesn't work that way. As far as I can tell there is no relationship whatsoever. There have been great artists who were commercially successful and great artists who virtually starved. And of course there has been utter crap that sold like hotcakes.

If we want a system of public funding of the arts the way to go is to subsidize music education and arts programs in our schools. People have to be trained to appreciate the best work. Unfortunately the folks who think that commercial success equals artistic success are the ones who control the purse strings and they detest public financing of anything except wars.


Ezra, one of the most well thought-out posts I've read in these forums, ever.

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Rick Keeney » Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:02 am

Steve Barber wrote:
FinderDoug wrote:
Shameful, one sided debate on this while I was out of the cosmos.
What's shameful is that you think debate should cease just because you're not around.


Um. This is one of those occasions in which I am dead certain Frank was writing with his tongue in cheek and was misunderstood as being self-obsessed.



You need to use those powers for good, my friend.

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Rick Keeney » Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:10 am

FrankChurch wrote:Why are people buying Taylor Swift's music, not downloading it free?


Was she offering it for free somewhere and I missed it?

I downloaded U2s new one. Did you all get that?

Once again, you're evading my questions, Franklin. That is both impolite and impolitic.

NOTE: I use precise vocabulary here in an effort to introduce Franklin to Merriam. (Webster)

Also are you familiar with Messrs Strunk and White?

Also the English language?

(See, what I did there? Lapsed into off-handed, and perhaps unfair, ridicule of your writing skills-thought many would argue with that assessment, I'm certain- while not really doing so good myownself. Is what I did.) (I blame Mrs. Folgers.)

(These ridiculously long parentheticals are ridiculously long.)))))))))))))))))))))))))) >))))'> fishie. it's fishie day

Maybe the Irish coffee next.

User avatar
Steve Evil
Posts: 3519
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Some Cave in Kanata
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Steve Evil » Sat Nov 22, 2014 12:24 pm

Ezra Lb. wrote:If we want a system of public funding of the arts the way to go is to subsidize music education and arts programs in our schools. People have to be trained to appreciate the best work. Unfortunately the folks who think that commercial success equals artistic success are the ones who control the purse strings and they detest public financing of anything except wars.


Frank Zappa said something similar to the PMRC. He reminded them firmly but none too gently that while they seemed inordinately concerned with the dreck kids were listening to, they were often the first ones to cut back music classes and music appreciation programs in schools.

Without exposure to anything else, how could kids (or anyone) be expected to listen to anything else?

I have found that kids who were deprived of music education from an early age quickly become alienated from anything but the top-40. Music for them ceases to be a participatory activity but an act of passive consumption. How could it be otherwise? Any more than a functionally illiterate person could be expected to enjoy great literature?

Even the most basic level of musical literacy demystifies the process - it ceases to be the exclusive purview of celebrities and hit-makers. It is not free, but immensely democratic - it's available to anyone who puts in the time and the effort. And it opens up worlds. I myself read music only at a Kindergarten level, and even that was enough - it was like learning the alphabet the first time.

Bit of a thread drift, sorry, but thought I'd throw it in.

User avatar
Steve Evil
Posts: 3519
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Some Cave in Kanata
Contact:

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby Steve Evil » Sat Nov 22, 2014 12:26 pm

And who was telling me sampling was music for poor people? Did he seriously mean to imply that turn-tables and piles of engineering software and equipment were inexpensive? Less so than a third-hand guitar, or recorder?

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Copyright vs Copywrong

Postby FrankChurch » Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:19 pm

Zappa told them to introduce kids to classical and jazz and not just mamby pampy pop music.


Return to “Pop Culture”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests