Techdirt shows people how to profit despite piracy, not profit from piracy, and that's where your whole argruement fails.
You seem to think the only proper response to piracy is to condemn and rail against it until it goes away, and any other thought is endorsing it, but all Techdirt is saying is accept the fact that it's not going away and figuring out how to deal with it.
I would say that's an option Techdirt proposes, but doesn't insist that all artists follow it. Some could sell their music and not do anything about it being free because of the effort involved. Not all artist are out to maximize sales of recordings. Some get paid in other ways. My local symphony is a great example.
And people can listen to music free if it's on the radio, but most of what I listen to is never played on the radio. And singing in the shower? Maybe if you've heard my music elsewhere you might sing it in the shower. There is still music out there I can only get if I purchase it - usually used so it's not profiting the artist.
Techdirt doesn't insist that an artist offer their music for free. It's always up to the artist (although more likely the publisher which owns the copyright) to choose how they offer their work.
What Techdirt says is that the music will be available for free whether the artist likes it or not, either through file sharing, public libraries, or trading with friends, and the artist must consider how they deal with that. The response initially was to just make it more and more illegal and futilely trying to make it go away, jeopardizing the open nature of the internet in the process. That's what Techdirt is against.
U2 has decided to find someone besides the fans to foot the bill, which is exactly the kind of business model exploration that Techdirt encourages. They've turned to a corporate benefactor the way classical composers once turned to royalty.
Now it's a question of whether Apple spent their money wisely and can this work for other artists in the future.
Last I heard, anyone can buy a domain and put up a website and host a video - even ISIS.
It's not the responsibility of private companies to host every video that's offered to them, and Youtube has some clearly established guidelines about real violence.
The only real free speech question is if ISIS should be allowed to host the video themselves.
Except it's a common tactic to bring up terrorism and child porn whenever copyright is mentioned so that people will eventually think that legislation for the former should include the latter too, or as a way to get a measure passed so a politician doesn't look like he supports child porn.
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
I've been getting plenty of free music since 1985 from the library, and before that I only listened to the radio - more free music.
You talk like music was never free until mp3s were invented, but the music industry has always thrived despite easy access to free music.
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Collecting cash from Apple
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
You seem to think the only proper response to piracy is to condemn and rail against it until it goes away, and any other thought is endorsing it, but all Techdirt is saying is accept the fact that it's not going away and figuring out how to deal with it.
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
And people can listen to music free if it's on the radio, but most of what I listen to is never played on the radio. And singing in the shower? Maybe if you've heard my music elsewhere you might sing it in the shower. There is still music out there I can only get if I purchase it - usually used so it's not profiting the artist.
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
What Techdirt says is that the music will be available for free whether the artist likes it or not, either through file sharing, public libraries, or trading with friends, and the artist must consider how they deal with that. The response initially was to just make it more and more illegal and futilely trying to make it go away, jeopardizing the open nature of the internet in the process. That's what Techdirt is against.
U2 has decided to find someone besides the fans to foot the bill, which is exactly the kind of business model exploration that Techdirt encourages. They've turned to a corporate benefactor the way classical composers once turned to royalty.
Now it's a question of whether Apple spent their money wisely and can this work for other artists in the future.
On the post: Forbes Praises YouTube Censoring Steven Sotloff Beheading Video
Re: Re: Editorial Policy
On the post: It Appears Mickey Mouse May Have Picked An Intellectual Property Fight With The Wrong Mau5
Re:
On the post: New Orleans Cab Company Owner Calls Uber A 'Cyber-Terrorist Group'
On the post: It Appears Mickey Mouse May Have Picked An Intellectual Property Fight With The Wrong Mau5
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: It Appears Mickey Mouse May Have Picked An Intellectual Property Fight With The Wrong Mau5
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Forbes Praises YouTube Censoring Steven Sotloff Beheading Video
It's not the responsibility of private companies to host every video that's offered to them, and Youtube has some clearly established guidelines about real violence.
The only real free speech question is if ISIS should be allowed to host the video themselves.
On the post: Texas Religious Leaders Try To Get Public Libraries To Ban Vampire Books For Them
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Texas Religious Leaders Try To Get Public Libraries To Ban Vampire Books For Them
On the post: FCC's Tom Wheeler Admits There Isn't Really Broadband Competition
Re: 3 choices???
On the post: Australian Movie Studio Says Piracy Is Equivalent Of Pedophilia & Terrorism
Re:
On the post: Australian Movie Studio Says Piracy Is Equivalent Of Pedophilia & Terrorism
Re:
On the post: Austrian ISPs Sued For Actually Wanting A Court Order Rather Than Just Blocking Websites Based On Entertainment Industry's Requests
Re:
"For years, the entertainment industry's dream was that the internet was more like television."
On the post: Disney Officially Seeks To Block Deadmau5's Trademark Claim
Next >>