ideally he would be in contact with his constituents through the use of various communication tools available to him. He would make regular appearances in is constituency where he would LISTEN rather then tell people his opinion. He would take the time to correspond with each letter writer personally as it is is job to represent all of the individuals within his district, not corporations or other special interest groups who don't really represent any of his constituents but rather just happens to make sure he get's his wallet padded.
Well that is the question isn't it. Luckly, despite our brainwashing, there is an entire world outside of the USA. I'm wondering that perhaps the problem lies with our size. Living in an empire sure makes things impersonal so my first guess would be to try a country that is a little bit smaller, where people can't get away with being an asshole so easily because eventually, when you've been an asshole for long enough, mostly everyone knows you are an asshole and they stop putting up with you. What do you think? ;)
It is "us" against "them". I know that I certainly don't want to listen to the music they are desperately trying to force me to buy. Maybe if we get our way, and the masses get to "steal" all their hard work, then maybe they will finally stop actually making that crap. :)
I make a lot of different kinds of music, broken TV hissing just being one of them. And believe it or not, there are a lot of fellas out there that are a lot smarter and a lot more talented then I am at such things (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_music for a quick history lesson on the art of electronic music, you may be surprised who else is responsible for lots of broken TV hissing). It's totally okay that it's not your thing and I can understand your perspective. Sometimes art can be a difficult thing to get. So can science. You may also want to read up on causation and correlation for a better understanding of what the universe may hold in store for you.
Thanks for taking some time to listen to some of the work I have available on my website, even if it's not your cup of tea. It's always nice to get someone's opinion (even the negative ones). :)
This is a good start, but it doesn't prevent the recording industry from buying laws to make this kind of thing harder. You might not be directly contributing to the industry but they are able to prevent you from enjoying Did you know that in Philadelphia, you cannot have live music in your establishment without a proper license. Many small coffee shops cannot have musicians perform in their establishments and many of the venues that had once provided a wide variety of musical entertainment have disappeared only to be replaced by venues own by big corporations like Clear Channel. Where do you think such a requirement for this license came from?
The time for intellectual discussion and debate is well behind us as most of the intellectuals already know and have debated the topic 10 years ago. Now is the time for action, and that is only possible by educating the general public of what that opinion is. This will probably no longer seem open or engaging because in reality it's not.
"Now power to them. Do it. Enjoy it. Have a nice day. Just enjoy doing things like promotion, distribution, and whatever else by yourselves too."
Absoultely and there have been a few that have done so successfully. You say that as if it was some kind of unrealistic expectation of an artist. There are plenty of examples of artists who were successful of promoting and distributing their own works, whithout the need for some middle man to take 90+% of the profits generated by their endeavors. Take a look at The Offspring as an example.
The problem doesn't lie in the abilities of artists to do these things "by themselves" but rather the expectations of aspiring artists for what they want to become. Why is an musical artist performing their craft? Is it sex, drugs, and rock & roll? Not exactly a healthy combination of aspirations that make for a good business model, in any business. But that seems to be the public image of what being a "rockstar" is about, rather then making music that people will enjoy and connect with. Just look at American Idol. Note the key word, idol? Not American Singer, or Best Gosh Darn Country Band Ever. The emphasis is on the adoration of their starhood rather then the absolution of their talent.
How many morbidly obese, pasty skinned, diva stars are there in the popular music world? I haven't see any, but I doubt that it's only perfectly per-portioned African American beauties that have the rhythm & blues enough to move the world. But that's all we get, and that's because "sex sells" (well to young, and some not so young, boys and girls who have been brainwashed into believing that this is visual prettiness the only measure of success).
And all this is totally mute when promotion and distribution are becoming less and less cost prohibited by the advent of the internet. Anyone with a good head on their shoulders, a good idea (or musical talent in this case), a little know how, and the ability to beat some feet, can make some sort of mark on the world if there is even a minute amount of interest at large. We are talking about a world of over six billion people, a good proportion of whom (at least those with money to burn on your product) are connecting to the internet hoping that they find what it is they are looking for, and that might just be you.
So, what does it even mean these days when we start talking about the "recording industry"? What is their purpose when all those things that they did in the past, studio recording, promotion, distribution, etc... are no longer out of reach of the smallest mortal being at a tiny fraction of the cost of what it had once been? In reality, it means they are now irrelevant. Irrelevant to the degree that those in charge of that industry are doing everything they can to make sure they keep their control over what they were once able to keep by fiat. In today's world, that means paying big money to those who make laws, and specifically they want them to make laws to prevent those now empowered "little guys" from encroaching into their territory, recording, promotion, and distribution.
Isn't that the point? To get attention to the current situation. I don't know about you but most people don't get called into action by reading technical manuals. They are energized by passionate speech and prose.
As for respect, I respect the opinion that is honest in it's design more so then if it's entirely based upon absolutes of knowledge. The recording industry is basing their rhetoric on a lot of "shady business" where as the opposition doesn't really have much to gain in return for their opinion, except, ultimately, their own personal liberty and political freedom of expression.
precisely. I'm an artist. I give away my music for free. I do so simply because I enjoy doing it. My motivation has never been for fame or notoriety, or even financial success in doing so. Even in those cases where I did sell my music (http://zenapolae.com) I did so simply because it was the status quo to do so. Oddly enough it's been a lot more enjoyable since I've stopped going that route.
Re: Re: Re: Better off...
The representative IS the citizens lobby.
Re: Re: Re: Better off...
Re: Re: disgusting
Re: Re: Re:
sorry, just playing along with the name calling game you got going here.
What were you trying to say again? I keep missing it.
Re: Re: Re:
I think that Access Canada is right!
Re: Re: How are a few user-submitted designs the same as 'free work' from the public?
:p
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Two on the money
Thanks for taking some time to listen to some of the work I have available on my website, even if it's not your cup of tea. It's always nice to get someone's opinion (even the negative ones). :)
Re: Brilliant minds/Narrow thought process
The time for intellectual discussion and debate is well behind us as most of the intellectuals already know and have debated the topic 10 years ago. Now is the time for action, and that is only possible by educating the general public of what that opinion is. This will probably no longer seem open or engaging because in reality it's not.
Re: Re: The RIAA Has a Right and is Right.. but is Wrong
Absoultely and there have been a few that have done so successfully. You say that as if it was some kind of unrealistic expectation of an artist. There are plenty of examples of artists who were successful of promoting and distributing their own works, whithout the need for some middle man to take 90+% of the profits generated by their endeavors. Take a look at The Offspring as an example.
The problem doesn't lie in the abilities of artists to do these things "by themselves" but rather the expectations of aspiring artists for what they want to become. Why is an musical artist performing their craft? Is it sex, drugs, and rock & roll? Not exactly a healthy combination of aspirations that make for a good business model, in any business. But that seems to be the public image of what being a "rockstar" is about, rather then making music that people will enjoy and connect with. Just look at American Idol. Note the key word, idol? Not American Singer, or Best Gosh Darn Country Band Ever. The emphasis is on the adoration of their starhood rather then the absolution of their talent.
How many morbidly obese, pasty skinned, diva stars are there in the popular music world? I haven't see any, but I doubt that it's only perfectly per-portioned African American beauties that have the rhythm & blues enough to move the world. But that's all we get, and that's because "sex sells" (well to young, and some not so young, boys and girls who have been brainwashed into believing that this is visual prettiness the only measure of success).
And all this is totally mute when promotion and distribution are becoming less and less cost prohibited by the advent of the internet. Anyone with a good head on their shoulders, a good idea (or musical talent in this case), a little know how, and the ability to beat some feet, can make some sort of mark on the world if there is even a minute amount of interest at large. We are talking about a world of over six billion people, a good proportion of whom (at least those with money to burn on your product) are connecting to the internet hoping that they find what it is they are looking for, and that might just be you.
So, what does it even mean these days when we start talking about the "recording industry"? What is their purpose when all those things that they did in the past, studio recording, promotion, distribution, etc... are no longer out of reach of the smallest mortal being at a tiny fraction of the cost of what it had once been? In reality, it means they are now irrelevant. Irrelevant to the degree that those in charge of that industry are doing everything they can to make sure they keep their control over what they were once able to keep by fiat. In today's world, that means paying big money to those who make laws, and specifically they want them to make laws to prevent those now empowered "little guys" from encroaching into their territory, recording, promotion, and distribution.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Two on the money
As for respect, I respect the opinion that is honest in it's design more so then if it's entirely based upon absolutes of knowledge. The recording industry is basing their rhetoric on a lot of "shady business" where as the opposition doesn't really have much to gain in return for their opinion, except, ultimately, their own personal liberty and political freedom of expression.
Re: Re: Re: Two on the money
Re: topics flattened?
topics flattened?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by zenasprime.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt