Posted on 04/02/2005 4:37:22 AM PST by billorites
As the berobed Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court sat pestering the suits who came before them days ago to contest Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer v. Grokster...
Conundrum #1: Has the Internet, the most powerful information pump the world has ever known, drowned the incentive to create in words or images?
Conundrum #2: Has the Internet effectively displaced the antique notion of the profit-motive with a newer, unstoppable reality that everything on the Internet is, if it wants to be, "free"?
Conundrum #3: How is it that millions of Americans who wouldn't cross the street against a red light will sleep like lambs after downloading onto their computers a Library of Alexandria's worth of music or movies--for free.
Even writers gotta eat. But this means one has to buy into the validity of eeeek, "profit." Absent that, there's no hope.
New business models like iTunes and techno-fixes such as micropayments matter a lot, but the unshakable reality is that digits and microchips are not like any previous reproducing technology. If you can digitize it, you can grab it, for free.
No matter what the Supreme Court decides about Grokster's 15 minutes of fame, this is a philosophical issue for the long run. The Web isn't just a technology; it's become an ideology. The Web's birth as a "free" medium and the downloading ethic have engendered the belief that culture--songs, movies, fiction, journalism, photography--should be clickable into the public domain, for "everyone."
What a weird ethic. Some who will spend hundreds of dollars for iPods and home theater systems won't pay one thin dime for a song or movie. So Steve Jobs and the Silicon Valley geeks get richer while the new-music artists sweating through three sets in dim clubs get to live on Red Bull. Where's the justice in that?
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Did you even bother to look, dumbass?
Do we need a new acronym here at FR? "RTFC?"
And I assume it is WAAAAYY too much to ask to look for WHY there was no presumed common law basis for copyright. Can you say "royal prerogative of monopoly priviledges." That's right: Copyright was controversial because, on the cafe of it, it flunks the King George test.
I agree and that is why the RIAA has picked on kids, college students and grandmothers to sue, people who can't afford the litigation. Hopefully, the Big Brother spying makes them sue someone who will fight back.
OK . . . you're welcome to argue that Will Smith deserves to be a multimilionaire for his displays of "talent". Color me unimpressed.
You rightly point out that my estimation of the value of his contribution is irrelevant. You're wrong in saying that I don't believe in the free market and it's ability to appropriately value that contribution.
I believe in that whole heartedly and I believe that the market is driving the behvior you don't like. The market punishes the greedy. The market takes and unkind view of products that are not packaged for the convenience of its consumers.
I'm not arguing against the right of musicians to profit from their labors, but rather I'm arguing against an industry that exploits both the producers and consumers of the product it sells.
I'm still unmoved by your recriminations. I've stolen nothing and I certainly don't feel guilty for a "crime" that I haven't committed.
Lifted directly from Article 1, Section 8 ( without having to pay a premium ). Actually, progress in Science and the useful Arts means that these items should eventually enter the public domain. If these items did not enter the public domain eventually, no progress.
I'm not sure music really fits into the "useful Arts" category, but that's just me.
Wait till I tell him that I've copyrigthed the name "CarolinaGuitarman", and all variations thereof, and that he owes big bucks for violating my copyright.
That's why it specifically states 'for a limted time' I don't consider a century or two as a 'limited time'.
It is. It's theft. You are a thief, but don't worry. Most thieves feel no guilt. You and Slick Willie are peas in a pod. Enjoy.
Yes. Every day on grokster, kazzaa etc.
Any time your ready to grab reality by the horns, let me know. No one is concerned about public domain songs. It'd be real nice for a bad typist like me to not have to state the obvious EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Where have I advocated that? I think I said that grokster, the company, induced theft. and i have said that all you illegal mp3 downloaders are thieves. Should the tool be shut down? I don't recall having said that. Maybe you can show me where I did.
I'm a Scalia-style interpreter of the constitution. I think "limited time" means exactly what it says. There is no reason at all, and certainly no requirement, that the length of copyrights match whatever was in force in their day. That requirement doesn't exist. We are free to legislate that ourselves. Since recorded music hadn't even been invented, makes sense to me that we do. There's no riddle in that. It's just the facts.
Here's another anti-capitalist. See? It's ok to steal because Will Smith doesn't "deserve" to make all that money. Ted Kennedy would be proud!
Can you believe the arguments on here? Will Smith doesn't deserve it. Musicians think too highly of themselves. The truth is these people are babies. Immature babies who are willing to steal to feed their little baby appetites. They are on all fours with Slick Willie.
Yeah, we got that part. You probably let your mom pick up the check. Pay for ticket, take the ride, but man you bitch a lot about the routine expenses of that bar of yours.
If I were jpsb, and I wanted to find the next U2, I'd be looking for an artistic original band. U2 was never a cover band. They were a punk band playing their own songs from the get go.
To guard against the risk you hypothesize here, I'd have em sign a basic agreement when you book em, that has all the normal stuff about start time end time how many sets, pay, etc. and put language on the agreement that covers yer own butt so you don't have to pay if they violate your rules. You make them pay. Easy.
Then you're an idiot for booking them.
These are gutless wonders with no self control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.