|
|
Posted by PTravel on 12/08/06 22:54
"Bill" <trash@christian-horizons.org> wrote in message
news:85udnS2nNPOqfeTYnZ2dnUVZ_oannZ2d@golden.net...
>I fervently hope you have your wish: that every internet site stops anyone
>from posting any of your music. But let's be logical here: nobody pays to
>hear your music on the radio, so let's make sure the radio stations stop
>playing your music.
That's completely wrong.
Radio stations receive revenue from advertisers based on the number of
listeners. Radio stations pay license fees for the music they broadcast to
BMI and/or ASCAP.
Music that is broadcast on the radio most certainly does get paid for --
that's the incentive for composers to write more music.
And make sure that no one hears
> any of your songs on tv or in a film. If all of us work diligently
> towards your goal, before you know it, nobody will ever have heard of your
> music.
>
> There's a lot of talent in the world-- maybe not every singer has
> Christine Aquilera's breasts, but there are a lot of talented musicians.
> If you really want to take your music out of circulation, do it--
> someone else will be quite glad to trade the exposure for free downloads.
> If they are really any good, they will be able to sell tickets to live
> performances, and CD's to the significant chunk of the population that
> still prefers to buy in tangible form.
You do know, don't you, not all music is restricted to popular bands and pop
recording artists that want to generate interest among fans so that they
will attend their concerts and buy t-shirts. Just because the music model
with which your most familiar may derive benefit from the kind of
circulation that results from illegal song trading doesn't mean that all
composers would benefit.
>
> I have a feeling an entire generation of artists will need to get over it,
> and this will all be a non-issue for the generation that grew up
> downloading music.
I have a feeling that the generation that grew up downloading music is going
to change their attitude when they're out in the workplace trying to obtain
a financial benefit from the fruit of their labors.
>
> I don't like this solution, but it might be the only one: a surcharge or
> tax on all recordable media and internet accounts, pooled into a fund, and
> distributed to artists according to frequency of access of their material.
> In Canada, this surcharge is nominal and doesn't seem to annoy people
> particularly. In exchange, you can legally copy any CD you like.
That's a terrible solution. I don't copy CDs or download music, but I do
create my own DVDs and CDs. Why should I subsidize your music library?
>
> And that's going to be my last word on the subject. Whew!
>
>
> Christopher Campbell wrote:
> It is not a few tracks; it is all of them --
>> everything the artist has ever done, his entire life's work, now possibly
>> made worthless and irrelevant by the arrogant irresponsibility of a bunch
>> of self-serving YouTube clowns.
>>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|