Are People Resentful Of Content Creators?

from the not-that-I-can-see dept

Fri, Feb 19th 2010 11:11am — Mike Masnick

Martin Bosworth has written up a longish post discussing what he calls "The Creative Class War." It's an interesting read that hits on a lot of different points, many of which I agree with, and a few I don't agree with, but it's worth reading anyway, if only to be horrified by the news of a novel that apparently spends a few chapters following an "intellectual-property enforcer who literally tortures and dissects copyright infringers to death." Yikes.

There's too much in the post to respond to each of the points -- either the ones I agree with or disagree with -- but there was one concept that is part of the root of the argument which I simply don't believe is true, even though I've heard others say it as well. It's the idea that the views held by many people criticizing rights holders for being overly aggressive in enforcing their rights comes from some sort of "resentment" of content creators. Bosworth notes:

There's a long-simmering resentment of people that actually make art, and the Internet has brought it to the surface in a way we've never seen before.

I have to say that I just don't see this. It's an argument we've seen thrown out by various people who disagree with us at times ("you just say that because you've never created anything of value in your life!") but it doesn't ring true at all. First of all, many of us who fall on the side of often being critical of overly aggressive copyright enforcement are critical because we think that it will backfire and harm those that the law is supposed to "protect." The point of highlighting why it's a bad idea isn't that we resent those who did something creative, but because we want to see them succeed and making an anti-fan, anti-consumer decision will make that more difficult. It's not resentment at all.

Coming at the same question from the other direction, again, I have trouble seeing "resentment" as the issue at all. When we look at the success stories, the one thing that comes through loud and clear is that respecting fans results in those fans becoming incredibly loyal. They're loyal to a fault, in fact. There's no resentment there at all. If anything, at times, it seems to border on hero worship.

I'm not denying that there is some resentment out there of successful people. There are always some people who are resentful of others, but I just don't see that as a driving force in the criticism of content creators who choose a path that is anti-fan.

Update: Wow. So it turns out that Martin, who wrote the post above and sent it to me on Tuesday (and promised to write more on the subject) actually passed away on Wednesday. I'm really sorry to hear that. Very tragic.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: content, creators, fans, resentment

41 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

John Fenderson (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:25am

Hmmm...

I make a good living creating content and despite that (well, because of it,) I strongly criticize content creators who abuse copyright law.

I suppose that I resent myself, then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:36am
  
  Re: Resentment.
  I try to resent myself every day--but some days I just don't feel like it.
  
  ; P
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Catherine jennifer fusco, 20 Feb 2010 @ 3:24am
  
  Re: copyright laws/Intellectual property
  The ver 1st comment was exactly the one that said it all!Attention:AllReaders:..go to salon.com/Laura Miller writes: "Plagerism:The Next Generation?"RE:"Axolotl Roadkill..by a 17yr old Helena Hegmann,this,you MUST read..NO,not the [so-called]book!This concerns critics who are dismissing any&all exerpts,Enter:Jury member:"obviously,it isn't completely clean,but for me,it doesn't change my appraisal of the text[jury member&newspaper book critic[NY-Times]jury knew about plagerism [accusations before]Imagine,also Robert McCrum,pointed out "Novelists& other artists,however,are always boasting about how much they "steal"[McCrum]the Guardian,tried to lighten his stupid remark saying,something else[read it!]To place this idiot Hegamann in catagory as a Novelist,is sickening!McCrum then said"how then can they -wax igdignant --when other writers lift their work?What,I said,what is "wax0indignant?,anyway..this said from the Guardian?My story started when my mom's expose'[1979] although unpublished,auto-bio["Just Tip Me Mister!"by Cecilia Sacco Fusco's 1st sybject-matter,ever written..HarperCollins published a book[same subject] silly "take" on same sub..BUT THEY USED HER COVER_DESIGN!HarperC actually said to her[phone] "well,he[other writer's book]didn't know the author!",then"Oh,she's not published?"[instead of the words[UNpublished]what publisher thinks because you don't know another author,besides not doing research..thinks it's OK to just use another copywritten source?They did!Techdirt would do nothing,never e-mailing back!See,this isn't the 1st thing to be copied,nor was this the whole story,her printer "pitched"her book,to NBC[1980's] thus "It's A Living"[sitcom] suddenly aired[printer of her book was in L.A.!We wanted to sue,but lawyer said it would have been expensive]well forget that,today we would have left it up to the courts,then again we're not talking about "online",try this "piracy" w/ a well known author!McCrum's passivity,is sickening!Two covers,side-by-side,SAME![Bill-of-fare!]a lawyer[being Italian}let me say not all Italians are loyal to one another roots[If the lawyer had been a Jewish att'y,he'd have done something,let's get real here,I know for a fact "our kind" should never be near litarary issues,get real,the creativity,& expertise of the Jewish people far surpasses the cowardess of an Italian..he couldn't do anything,huh?Oh yes he could have,that 24yr old novice who wrote smut,irresponsibly depicted the business if "waiting" as joke!It is not a joke,not when you're a woman alone,supporting a child,owning ones home at age 26!There was no "fight"in his book!No story,so while we've had a history w/ many national tv appearances[mother]"Donohue" "Cosmopolitan Mag"[more] still "O" win-free could not relate,she's no literary queen,{remember "A Million Little Pieces?'James Frey's admitted lie[thesmokinggun]Winfrey never answered my call,while I never asked for her "critique!"[please..]she's no scholar!All I wanted was her to read it.."JTMM!" has been read by the best!I hardly think "O" is anyone,an intellegent reader,waits for,re:her book club choices!She "ignored" me!Then again what would she have in common w/ a woman who "worked" so hard to have the finer things in life?"O's" "Hero's" are all black!Isn't a woman who in the late 50's when women held on their husbands for fear of working..isn't that story re: a woman who lifted heavy trays,w/ no alimony,no support,no indulgencies,how could she relate to that,afterall where's that man who got her on tv?Fought for her?She never mentioned him once nor has she evr written anything,perhaps she too needs a ghost writer like Palin[have an article,wow,re:Palin..]next time]because if you ever read "O's" last page in her Mag?You could not imagine what fame really did to for her ego..she stinks,she's almost illiterate!So salon's comments were all on the side of sanity,while this german..baby steps writer whose father didn't remind her she cannot take things from "STROBO",that would be "infrigement,my stupid little twit daughter!"Can you imagine someone said,had she known?she said this too!Laura Miller adds,by line[Or are we too old to understand?"Too Old to comprehend,you mean,what does being too old mean when the written word,never cahnges?Comments gave that back to her,including the parents who say "they grow up right in your "midst"& still we don't know them/Growing up "IN A Mist"is more appropriate!Bigger sales,they said"because of that "AXOLOTI ROADKILL" the sales of "STROBO" have gone up..one of those jerks said this,so this means "the means justifies the Ends?"right?Trying to justify that one book has stimulated the interest[again] in another book is so twisted,no intellegent person could utter such crap!"ATONEMENT" another..they took words,[immortal]from Austen's work,but that was ok,I don't know what's going on here,but let them try to Steal again anything from "Just Tip Me Mister!"or any other,say John Grisham novel,we;ll see if he just dismisses that!By the way how many good writters were turned down[not for writing merit]but editor's are sometimes..frustrated writers who are illiterate[intellectually,anyway]today these ver authors are household names!"SLEEPER",that's the word..for "Just Tip Me Mister![letters.mobile,salon.com]story behind the unjust "STIGMA" mentality!These publishers allow this stealing,Harper Collins?If we had an agent,that book would been off the shelves,putting it where it belongs..File 13..it is amockery,done by a silly,irresponsible,fat guy whose publisher thought if you're unpublished,it means your wtitten word is diminished,to just not being published?Author who write this 1st ever to be explored business,when they've written everything else,mundane as they are...this book will catch the eye of a less cowardess agent,or just someone other than those who eat out,thinking the food flies to their table!Sorry,got carried away..but think is this a stigma because of the "waiting factor?" or is it the "waiting factor" the reason for the "stignma?" can a secretary make in month what wautress makes in 4 days?Does she work hard at all,still it sounds so much better when asked"what do you do for a living?"whic one do you want to answer to,when faced w/ a pretentous public?This book was read by women all over the U.S..it is funny,sad,restaurant was famous Babylon Seafood house[L.I/NY] where "quitting" was not an option!If every time her boss exhibited her abusive nature,she'd have quit 10X..but disipline made this book..you couldn't make up the things between the customers & waitress! thank you cjenn@ptd.net
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Catherine jennifer fusco, 20 Feb 2010 @ 3:58am
    
    Re: Re: copyright laws/Intellectual property
    continued from Unpublished book!
    Note:to add..The story re: the mid-80's sitcom.."It's A Living" was a sudden shock,but right after he printed "Just Tip Me Mister!"by Cecilia Sacco Fusco..he took her book to the very same place..NBC!"Where did you get the idea"was asked when author called them,,first,he was "out-of-town" until she made her reason clear..he suddenly answered[Thomas,Witt&Harris]accepted an idea re:this book's contents..they didn't ask questions? The characters were the exact counterparts,depicting their positions,one inparticular,the hostess,who was made to look and sound exactly the same as the book's character,what was insulting,were the waitresses dressed in..well,dresses!high heels,holding bar trays,not lifting heavy trays..the lawyer told author to monitor the dialog,,it wasn't until after her call,did the producers finally conclude the friendly printer friend was pitching an already copywritten source! Her call alerted them..the sitcom never aired,their dirty laundry,as the silliness ended,soon after..was the dialog all ready to be aired???Afterall the printer WAS going to L.A.[it was clear it was him,& we didn't sue,rather he was told return all books,& they'd not press charges..that's because our[daughter&mother] lawyer wasn't man enough,rather somewhwhat of a coward,like the att'y who dismissed the cover-design?[There are more literary atty's,his word wasn't the end all..This book doesn't fall into the "pay for your own book to be published catagory"It has already been around,stolen idea's noe the cover??
    To end,allow me to educate those on "Gone With The Wind's" history,we met the little old lady who said "yes" to Margaret Mitchell..after 38X..the publishers,saying "it's so long,so huge!"[really,well wasn't the civil war huge,long too,fool] Miss Annie Laurie Williams was the woman who made "GWTW" the classic it is today!Few know that bit of info! So,to continue the 500 copies are available for anyone who wants to read it,if by chance a bonified publisher,agent who will do the work to introduce this "Sleeper",,will[by law] be rewarded a "FindersFee",I'm just sayin',if & or when we make websight,it will sell out,then what,there will be none left? So the heading will read "NEED PUBLISHER"[an agent,no,it's past agents!You will [as they say]not want to put it down]..Perhaps "O" win[free who got LUCKY,in life would be exhausted by the time she finished the book!she bever worked one day,manual labor that is! Why do "idle" women seek out people devoid of any intellectual depth? If "O" is their "idol",must have the same in common,because if a woman worked hard to make it,struggled for something,how can they ever relate to thiose who it tough? Someday I will tell the world[Media] that she ignored a simple request..I wanted her to read about a woman who "struggled",seems miss "O" is inferior to that subject! Go to letters.mobile.salon.com..thank you tech dirt I gave you the literary dirt,& even you did nothing,noit even an acknowledgement..
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Any Mouse, 20 Feb 2010 @ 11:52am
      
      Re: Re: Re: copyright laws/Intellectual property
      Try something for us? Proper punctuation and separation into coherent thoughts and paragraphs? Your posts, as written, are unfocused and unintelligible.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 20 Feb 2010 @ 7:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: copyright laws/Intellectual property
      Thanks for 2 unintelligible posts, jennifer. You want to be understood, make the damn effort.
      
      Line breaks. Use them.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard Corsale, 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:35am

yyyyyyyyeah , I like Mobi, his view is that "The audience is undervalued" he said that many artists feel like it's them against the audience. .... apparently hes right. Not that the audience is against the artist, but that the artists are all paranoid.

I wonder who plants these seeds of panic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
chris (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:37am

hate the middlemen
The point of highlighting why it's a bad idea isn't that we resent those who did something creative

i think that the resentment isn't directed at content creators, but at the business people who surround creators.

i my self have fallen for the "i'm a musician and you don't know what being a musician is like" line of thinking. the counter point make is pretty much always, "i'm the consumer, i'm the one with the money. if you want it sell something i want to buy." that's not really a constructive conversation.

the resentment content creators have over the perceived greed of their fans, and the resentment fans have over the perceived greed of content creators should be directed at the weasels in the middle, the ones who screw artists over, treat customers like criminals, and bribe politicians to pass laws that threaten our civil liberties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Infamous Joe (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:36pm
  
  Re: hate the middlemen
  i my self have fallen for the "i'm a musician and you don't know what being a musician is like" line of thinking. the counter point make is pretty much always, "i'm the consumer, i'm the one with the money. if you want it sell something i want to buy." that's not really a constructive conversation.
  
  I don't have any problem with that conversation, as written. It is the simple truth. If you've decided to become a musician to make money, then you have to produce something that I, the consumer, want, and sell it at a price I'm willing it pay. There is no getting around this. Even making up ridiculous laws saying I have to buy it at $0.99 because you say so doesn't stop the fact, as piracy shows. Since the trend is clear that more and more people are seeing "$0" as the acceptable price point, musicians (and other creative types) have to find a new way to survive in the market, or starve. That's life.
  
  PS- When I type "you" in this little rant, I don't mean you personally, I mean "you" in the more general sense. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - chris (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 1:28pm
    
    Re: Re: hate the middlemen
    PS- When I type "you" in this little rant, I don't mean you personally, I mean "you" in the more general sense. :)
    
    oh, i'm not a musician. my point should have been clearer. i meant that when a musician trots out the "i am a musician" line, my response has always "if you want my money..." the point is that creators and fans should not be arguing with each other. they should unite against the middlemen.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:47am

I don't resent either the creators, nor the rights hoders. I resent the excesses upholding their rights. I resent to feel treated as a criminal every time a movie starts. I resent to be a criminal every time I wanna watch a movie with the company of my friends, at my home. I resent that I can't tell a visiting friend that he can lend the "content" that I have or ask him for his. I resent that I have to teach my kids that sharing is wrong. I resent that I can't reuse my "bought" content with other devices in my home. I resent that trying to watch a video of some song on YouTube to see if I like it, I can't. I resent that doing this things online 3 times may lead to be disconnected. I resent that using and sharing a few bytes of digital information may lead to bankrupcy for the rest of my life. I resent that "buying" a e-book to use on my e-reader may not work. I resent that having bought a book, I can't OCR it to my e-reader to read it where and when I damn well want to. etc...

We fans/consumers/clients also should have rights to the content we pay for. But, apparently, we only have the right to be extorted again and again and again for the same content. We can't even return it if in the end it doesn't please us.

So, yeah, there's loads of reasons to be resentful, but, not at the creators. They are our suppliers, we need them, we cherish them, we (sometimes) love them. What we don't like is the "middle-man" that is actualy leeching both sides.

Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:55am
  
  Re:
  Agreed. This 'special snowflake' attitude attributed to creators and fans (with or without justification) is not the issue. It's wide of the mark and even delusional.
  
  It's consumer resentment borne out of market and tech shifts that legacy industries refuse to accept.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:53am

This sounds like...
"Please don't hate me because I'm so beautiful."

Get over yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 11:57am

Arrogance
When so called "creatives" set themselves up above everyone else is it any surprise that people will resent them?

It is a matter of personal attitude. Last year I spent a weekend learning to improve my singing at a course run by a well known folk singer.

Apart from the wonderful singing I was struck by the humility of the person concerned. I felt that I had experienced the reality of the saying in the Gospel "He who is greatest amongst you shall be the servant of all".

No one could possibly resent such a person.

If you feel that your fans/audience/customers resent you then look to your own behaviour and attitude - that is where you will find the reason.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:49pm
  
  Re: Arrogance
  If there's any truth in this resentment of artists thing, it's right here. People don't find it hard to resent somebody they see as a whiny, spoiled slut who has a decent singing voice and all but manages to make millions. Look at the opposite end of the spectrum, and it's pretty hard to feel resentment toward an artist like Nina Paley, who the audience can sympathize with and have real meaningful interactions with.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:07pm

I'm resentful of cableco/telco/public airwave monopolies granted (by the government) to the highest bribers ... I mean, bidders, that make the lives of content creators miserable by intentionally ensuring that the only content that gets broadcasted across these venues is owned by a hand full of people and hence limiting the distribution of content owned by independent artists or released under a CC license.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
San Antonio Employment Lawyers, 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:17pm

The priority needs to quit being put off the consumer and onto the artist. It is the product and the audience and trying to avoid getting in the way of that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wolfy, 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:19pm

resentment of the creative minded
Try bouncing this flawed idea off a few Elvis fans and see what you get... I'll bet you'd get many puzzled expressions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bishboria (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:30pm

Are the content creators the problem, or the parties that "represent" the content creators that are the problem?

I know what I think anyway!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skeptical Cynic (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:35pm

It's not the content creators, stupid!
It's being forced to pay because of the copyright laws more than we think it is worth. Example: I have bought video games that were 15-18 hours from start to finish where most games are over 20. Mind you I am old gamer, almost 40 and married with a baby so I don't play all that often. Well do you think I feel ripped off because all new games for the Xbox 360 cost 59.99 when the game comes in short? It's the same reason that I haven't bought a CD in 19 years. I don't feel I am getting what I paid for. Fixed pricing for content is stupid. Let the market tell you the correct price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Capitalist (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:51pm

Stop the Emo Train
I love artists, musicians, creative types of all kinds. But with a couple of my acquaintances in the field, I often feel the need to grab a hold and shake them out of a depressive stupor and yell "It's NOT all about YOU".

For my own part, I have two simple, personal beliefs at play in the copyright wars, which I will list in order of personal priority. Unfortunately, number one made the list a few years back.

1) People deserve to be free and to express freely

2) Artists deserve to get paid for their work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 1:23pm
  
  Re: Stop the Emo Train
  2) Artists deserve to get paid for their work.
  
  Really? Who says? Shouldn't that be up to the market? Should people be guaranteed an income for whatever "work" they may do? If so, then I've been ripped off because I know I've invested work into several things that didn't pay off in the end.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Free Capitalist (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 1:35pm
    
    Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
    No one wrote that artists are entitled to get paid.
    
    Of course I also did not write, "artists deserve to get paid, and those who refuse to pay should be held liable in civil and criminal court"... which just might be your real issue here.
    
    As far as consumers in the market, I'm afraid I need to redirect you Wikipedia: Caveat Emptor
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 1:52pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
      No one wrote that artists are entitled to get paid.
      
      Including myself. Straw man much?
      
      which just might be your real issue here.
      
      No, my point was that you made the unequivocal statement that "Artists deserve to get paid for their work", and I think that should be up to the market. I don't see anything that makes artists so "special" that they "deserve" special treatment.
      
      You have an odd perspective for someone using "Free Capitalist" as a moniker.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Free Capitalist (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 2:45pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
        Let me try to put this simply for you, since you may be coming from a different moral framework that myself.
        
        You "deserve" to get paid for your work just as much as Bill Gates "deserves" to get paid for his work. However, I doubt you get paid as much as Bill Gates. This does not make you any less worthy.
        
        Getting paid for your work in this society is survival, at least *money is survival. (If you do not have to get paid any more to survive, whether by the fruits of your own efforts or through free rent and board in your parents' basement, more power to you, same goes).
        
        Survival is not guaranteed, but everyone is deserving of life.
        
        That is what I mean by deserving. That is the difference between "deserving" and "entitled" that you seem to miss.
        
        None of these ethical views precludes the existence, understanding or practice of free market principles, even in our not-so-free market.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 3:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
        Survival is not guaranteed,
        
        It really never is.
        
        but everyone is deserving of life.
        
        Perhaps you should tell that to some insurance companies.
        
        That is the difference between "deserving" and "entitled" that you seem to miss.
        
        No, you don't seem to understand the difference between deserving the *opportunity* to try to make money and deserving to be just paid whether you are successful or not. That's not how free markets work.
        
        None of these ethical views precludes the existence, understanding or practice of free market principles,
        
        To the contrary, the idea that people "deserve" to be paid regardless of their success in the market is the very antithesis of free market principles.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Free Capitalist (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 4:28pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
        No, you don't seem to understand the difference between deserving the *opportunity* to try to make money and deserving to be just paid whether you are successful or not. That's not how free markets work.
        
        Well, that pretty much sums up the personal view I am sharing, only you seem to think "deserve" without "an opportunity" after the word changes the meaning of "deserves" to "entitled".
        
        We're done here young AC.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 5:03pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop the Emo Train
        Well, that pretty much sums up the personal view I am sharing, only you seem to think "deserve" without "an opportunity" after the word changes the meaning of "deserves" to "entitled".
        
        There's a huge difference between saying that someone deserves money and saying that they deserve the opportunity to earn money. The former is what you originally said, and the latter is what you didn't. I don't much see how you can deny that.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 12:58pm

People do not resent content creators. People resent copyright and IP maximalists. Being a content creator does not make one an ass. Acting like an ass makes one an ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
greenbird (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 1:22pm

Twisted Value System
I think they have a twisted value system if think art is the only thing one can create that's worth something. I create stuff that's worth something every day. I dare say that what I create is worth far more than a book or music since it actually adds to the overall society in an actual material way, actually improving the tangible aspects of society. A ditch digger generally is digging ditches that improve infrastructure adding to the ability of everyone in society to make a better life for themselves. They just don't have specialized laws giving them a ridicules level of control over the ditch they created such that they and their offspring get paid for 100 years every time anyone happens to use the ditch they created.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Feb 2010 @ 7:18am
  
  Re: Twisted Value System
  A ditch digger generally is digging ditches that improve infrastructure adding to the ability of everyone in society to make a better life for themselves. They just don't have specialized laws giving them a ridicules level of control over the ditch they created such that they and their offspring get paid for 100 years every time anyone happens to use the ditch they created.
  
  Wow...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
hegemon13, 19 Feb 2010 @ 2:32pm

Almost right...
"There's a long-simmering resentment of people that actually make art, and the Internet has brought it to the surface in a way we've never seen before."

There's a long-simmering resentment of people that distribute art, and the Internet has brought to the surface, in a way we've never seen before, that they are no longer necessary.

There, I fixed it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 7:04pm
  
  Re: Almost right...
  Nailed it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
AW, 19 Feb 2010 @ 3:40pm

Artists that are absolutely not resented by their fans
Wil Wheaton
Joss Wheedon
Bruce Campbell
Nathan Fillion
Michael Jackson
Moby
Pistol Shot Gypsy (Okay you've never heard of them but hey are highly under rated)
Kevin Smith
Grateful Dead
Phish

Groups resented by the public
Metallica
Lily Allen
Anyone who acts like their fans owe them something

The difference between the two groups is that one knows how to cultivate a relationship and the others don't. Perhaps some more people need to read "How to win friends and influence people" by Dale Carnegie and they might persuade more people to see their side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spanky, 19 Feb 2010 @ 5:02pm

"There's a long-simmering resentment of people that actually make art, and the Internet has brought it to the surface in a way we've never seen before. "

There may be among the greedy bastids in the music industry, but not from me. I have no problem with the artist. I do have a problem with the middlemen who raise prices, siphon off the profits, and do absolutely nothing for it.

Bosworth is simply a revisionist. Or stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2010 @ 5:20pm

resentment? - not so much

more like revulsion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
toddski (profile), 19 Feb 2010 @ 7:14pm

"Anyone who acts like their fans owe them something"

Yes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
harbingerofdoom (profile), 20 Feb 2010 @ 3:41pm

i do not resent content creators. quite the opposite actually.
if it were not for content creators, movies TV internet and books would be quite boring.

what i resent is being treated like i am a criminal by content creators, being told that what I want as a customer is not what i really want and im just confused, that the government insists on agreeing with anything that those who represent the content creators simply because they bribe them in the form of legal campaign contributions and other such 'spiffs'.

THAT is what i represent.
thanks for making the content however, some of it is even pretty good!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rockman, 21 Feb 2010 @ 11:28am

interesting topic
i have an mfa, was a pretty good artist, post modern, assemblage, had work shown, good stuff.do i deserve to get paid.the answer is no.this isn't what some might want to hear but money will make a whore of everybody. if you're in art of some kind and i include music although i don't consider music to be critical enough to be important, money is going to corrupt you. if i was building a piece for a show was i making the critical decisions because that's what i felt or what i thought somebody wanted me to feel, because the idea of money was present.that is a very simple rendition of the dynamic, but its true. if i made art and i still do only as desktops with photoshop, my bfa was in printmaking, i give them away on torrents and such. i don't think any artist should charge for work, one reason that has been mentioned is you carry an awful lot of sleaze bags, scumming lawyer types that couldn't hit aesthetic with their bmw if it was standing in the street next to their crack whore girlfriend.and as honesty in disclosure there is absolutely no money in visual art, not unless you plan to get tenured somewhere. music is a 10 billion dollar a year scam full of idiots mediocre halfwits and the latest gimmick. most music is totally least common denominator.if you do visual art- give it away, attack the status quo, take this shyster middleman and deprive him of his oxygen, if he's not riding your back he's back to digging those ditches, yea let him copywrite that shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Catherine jennifer Morale/Fusco, 16 Oct 2010 @ 4:41am

Re: Unpublished but not "rejected" expose'{
Anyone w/ intellegence,& /or familiar w/ writters,& the"cut throat publishers"RE: :Just Tip Me Mister!"by Cecilai sacco Fusco {is not a "triumphant-success" story but rather an exploration re: a woman who worked hard,a disiplined ,woman who supported her only child in a time when most women were not independent rather dependent on their hubby's,also when government rewards like welfare,alimony,checks;,a story about a woman who owned her own home[new] at age 26,these were the days when such a book,publishers considered -a-mundane topic,but in no way did they dismiss her talent,her phrases,descriptive writting,so much of it's content,the very idea that a "waitress" would be honored,was so non exsitent rather shampooing a persons hair had more interest.."the very idea" well "Timing" has long passed until "eating" becomes non-exsistent this book is the{continues to be} the Sleeper" it is at no time than the present does this expose' need it's rightful place on the "Best Seller",as it doesn't matter each time we see such unworthy authors[so-called],on this list,it's a matter of "how long" they stay on it,& did the book have great revealtions,we haven't already heard like "Eat,Pray{Juli-ah} will go away},Love" the novice freelancer whose boss,&-her-position as..writer,w/ free flyer miles can take us through her journey around Europa,after just recovering from "operation break-up",the usual,but it's always so nice to suffer while you're not stressed out by financial worry,it's always nicer to "get over it" when you can do it while {eating-&-eating},exciting cuisine,you'd not normally eat if you hadn't gone to Europe,or did eat the same thing,but made differently,but ate,ate,loved,prayed as Jili-ah} "PrEyed" on us ,via mascara commercials! jusr read {salon.com}"Why We All Love Julia Roberts" those posters were sooo angry.."We Don't All Even Like Julia"..see if you're "lucky",you're in..if you have resources,if your name has clout,if not,one way or another,this book will hit,the "Broadway" stage,not made for tv,like when the printer stole the copyright then "pitched" the book to NBC[80's] thus the sickening "It's A Living" was aired,BUT it ended as soon as they were asked what their newfound interest in the "servitude" came from,the show quickly picked up the hint,after the author told them,this idea,however insulting was from her work,,the lwayer told her to monitor the show,,ggod thing,or they'd have had some lawsuit as they were indeed ready soon we would hear the author's dialog..what kind of producer just accepts a book thinking the author gave her rights to a printer,while her photo,& bio,was all over the book? The copyright was "stamped" "Cole.??Graphics?" in today's court,they'd have been exposed for such sloopy work not even to ask who the author was..I mean really..it's too a story the background,tv appearances,"Cosmopolitan mag" interview[so many others} that alone could become yet another book..it's all on the other salon site..I'm too tired to finish..the book doesn't concentrate on restaurantuers alone the interaction between cusrtomer & waitress one couldn't make up! This book,likened to Scott Turow who had to pa\y for his book's publication..unpublished doesn't mean dismissed talent,or sunject it wasn't the time they said well it has been overdue,,John Q.Public,& the waitresses who,read the book those asking where they could get it..so "Eat,Love,Pray" or was it "Eat,Pray,Love"..it's ok for her to eat because she's not serving herself nor did she have to cook it herself..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
James Boss, 15 Nov 2014 @ 6:41am

Best Waterproof Mascara
TWILASH is the most innovative and transformative breakthrough for beautifying and maintaining eyelashes since mascara creation. From dusk to dawn, twilash ...
http://www.twilash.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]