[quote name='mykevermin']I have a bias here.[/quote]
Judge Norstrom?
[quote name='mykevermin']I like physical albums - especially records. I like small record stores, and I listen to music that's by and large on smaller labels. When I have friends consolidating record stores over years, only to finally close them, I get upset. When I have colleagues who ran labels that put out niche music since the early 1990's because people aren't buying albums anymore and smaller stores (the ones who carry their albums) are going out of business, I look to pirates. I look to the fact that you can enter in "band name here" + "blogspot" and find a megaupload-like file service and download the entire album in moments - when I see google searches RECOMMENDING I add "blogspot" to the end of a band name, it says to me this is an ordeal, this is a problem.
Am I going to succeed in fighting it? Not at all. This is a generational trend that I can't fight. Let me show you how behind the times I am; when I bought my car 7 years ago, I paid EXTRA to have a cassette player put in it w/ the CD player. I still use it.
yeah I do.
But what I'm bothered by is considered normative behavior by people like camoor. The belief that we are ENTITLED to be ENTERTAINED, WHEN we want, and by WHATEVER we want, irrespective of whether or not we have to take someone else's property in order to be entertained. [/quote]
Noone took anything. Your class assignment for this thread is to go back and look at the picture of the pig until you get this. I'm tired of the strawman theft arguement, copyright infringement is not theft!
I feel bad for your friends just like I feel bad for the buggy whip factories that went out of business almost a century ago, I really do. Times of economic upheaval are tough on everyone, and I wish there were more small businesses out there making a sucessful go of it. But maybe that's a completely different topic.
[quote name='mykevermin']Moreover, legit attempts to perpetually entertain us that come with small fees and minor usage restrictions create further outrage by users.[/quote]
Small fees? Examples please. I have yet to see the "small fees" and as you admit you have no clue about technology so don't bother trying to impress us with your pontifications on what constitutes a minor usage restriction. I don't call a rootkit a minor usage restriction, I don't call a buggy 5 device limit that can't tell an upgrade from a new computer a minor usage restriction. You should really look at how the recording industry is acting, look how they try and crush the little guy with a tiny streaming radio station, look at the guilty plea to payola practices, look how they abuse the legal system to extort single mothers in the projects, handicapped, and poor college students before you dare to say there is no reason for outrage. There is plenty of bad behavior on both sides of the aisle.
[quote name='mykevermin']The modern consumer is short-sighted, has no concept of delayed gratification, no concept of paying for something, and a feeling that one deserves whatever it is that they're interested in, no restrictions and no questions asked, the very moment they desire it.[/quote]
You're largely right, with the exception of payment. The modern American consumer is very familiar with the concept of paying for what they want, they do it all the time. People don't steal rampantly, heck when it comes to largely voluntary activities like tipping or donating to charity most people do the decent thing. But in exchange for a reaonable fee the modern American consumer expects to get what they want, when they want it, how they want it (Is hard pleasing customer, eh comrade? Much better to collude with your competitors and setup a cartel flanked by an army of lawyers. Add payola to the mix and you have your own little money tree. Thankfully due to technology those days are over.)
[quote name='mykevermin']It is gluttony, it is selfishness, it is destructive, and it is theft. When I have a colleague shutting his label down while people like SneakyPenguin, the blog he hosts and the blogs he link to, provide me with access to downloading hundreds of albums by similar artists that I can acquire every last bit of within a matter of minutes...I am the one who clearly sees through the "if you like it, buy it please" lip service and into a realm of destructive and self-absorbed behavior that insists we are gluttonous kings. We are entitled to be entertained by what we want, when we want it, and how we want it. And anyone who gets in our way of being perpetually entertained is a fascist oppressor, and will be destroyed. Bring on more entertainment for the lords!
WE DEMAND TO BE ENTERTAINED! PRODUCE, MONKEYS! PRODUCE![/quote]
As you say, you can't fight it. However your doom and gloom assessment does not jive with history. Yes the market landscape will shift, the music industry will change, music distribution will adapt to new technology, but this being America it will get monetized. American consumer culture is gluttonous and selfish, no arguement there. But in the end someone always figures out how to turn a buck. The point of entertainment copyright is to encourage the creation of new art. Do the mickey mouse laws with their 99+ years of protection do that? Do the millions funneled to talentless payola-happy tastemakers and their corporate overlords do that? Do you really think this is the only way to encourage the creation or art, or even the best way? When people can put a large share of their money directly in the hands of the artists they like (ala NIN) it works about as well as it does in any other services industry. Record companies and their lawyers may not like it but cest la vie.
