Sun. Jun 22, 2003
Guinea Pigs in a Doomed Experiment
Guinea Pigs in a Doomed Experiment – There’s a couple of articles you really ought to take the time to read, especially if you believe in the right to download music for free. Oh, I know, it may be easy to ignore the views of “names” like Courtney Love and Janis Ian, when they’ve made more money than you ever will. Well, that’s even more reason to read these two articles. Courtney and Janis are aberrations, even in their “middling” success, as they work in a business where 99% struggle just to pay the bills. Read about the real world (and since you might not, I’m excerpting healthy chunks of each).
Start with “Everythings Coming Up Britney!”: “In the world of the fan, real musicians seldom think about money they’re too busy channeling their angst into another song for you and when they do, it’s only in terms of breaking even. A musician who takes seriously the financial realities of his craft is a sell-out. One who attempts to profit from his talent is the devil.”
“ ‘Musician’ is the only job title in the world other than ‘monk,’ ‘nun,’ or ‘priest,’ where those who benefit the most from your work expect you to do that work for cost, or free. At least monks and priests get health benefits. But to the music fan, musicians should be martyrs for their art. Believe me, it’s scary to realize that your financial future rests in the hands of a demented child who really, really loves you – as long as you behave according to a stringent set of creative and financial rules, that is.”
“The vast majority of working musicians are barely getting by. Again, the VAST MAJORITY. BARELY getting by. This is not subjective opinion this is fact. We can’t afford to have you stealing our music. Even if we could afford it, you’d still be wrong. Of COURSE you have the right to think that musicians shouldn’t make money. You also have the right to think that plumbers shouldn’t make money. You don’t, however, have the right to hire a plumber to fix your toilet and then pay him in Communist rhetoric. That’s how people end up with pipe wrenches sticking out of their butts. People only steal from musicians because doing so is easy and anonymous. If they had to go through us to rip us off, few of them would dare. They couldn’t look us in the eye.”
“I believe that there are some misguided fans who really think they’re doing us and the world of music a favor by refusing to pay us anymore. I think there is a very nave, almost sweet (if it weren’t so wrong) desire on the part of some fans to destroy the industry so it can begin again, this time, honestly and sincerely [...] I mean, on one level, it’s a really beautiful wish, but for obvious reasons, I’d rather not be the guinea pig in that doomed experiment.”
“This revolution of theft is having an effect on the industry, no question. But it’s not taking out the big guns. They aren’t going anywhere. You’re killing the little guy. You’re ruining the very people that make music interesting, exciting, and vital. I hope you can manage to enjoy what will be left over, and when that day comes and it’s coming fast at least don’t insult our intelligence by blaming Metallica or the RIAA or Warner Bros. At least try to be honest enough to admit that it was your own willingness to rip off your heroes whether out of greed, or misplaced moral outrage, or both – that drove us out of the business. Don’t blame the big, bad corporations for killing rock and roll. Blame yourselves.”
And then read the companion piece from Doctor Frank, “Ben Weasel Speaks for Me”: “It’s astounding how many people don’t seem to realize that making music, like everything else, costs money. As Ben points out, most musicians don’t have a prayer of making a living at it; those that try usually end up living somewhere around or below the poverty line [...] Even if you’re the most selfless, ascetic, not-for-profit, doin’-it-for-the-kids, sacrificing-it-all-for-art music martyr who doesn’t mind living like a dog among dogs, the fact remains: if you’re going to make a record, the guy who runs the studio has to get paid. (You’re wondering where all those free studios are? They all had to close down because they couldn’t pay their rent.) Now this money has to come from somewhere. And the Free Music extremists don’t really seem to care where it comes from, as long as it isn’t them.”
“However, it seems to me that the decision of whether to make songs available for free really ought to rest with the writer, the artist, the copyright owner. And there is a general feeling on the part of Free Music advocates that this is an outrageous, unreasonable, scandalous expectation.”
And obviously, it’s a feeling that extends beyond the bounds of MP3’s, they are just the most prevalent coin in the realm of Internet-based copyright infringement. But they show up at my door as well: “If you don’t want people to steal your images, why do you put them on the Internet? The main goal of the Internet is to make copies.” And I try to swat down each one. But they are Legion.
It’s amazing that people are morally satisfied with acts that 10 years ago they would have quickly identified as “theft.” The difference? Today, they can do it in their living room. Anonymously. Without looking a victim in the eye. And since there is no physical object they “took,” they’re comfortable saying it isn’t stealing, it’s “downloading.”
Go ahead, read all of these two pieces. Look Ben and Frank in the eye. They are yet another representation of the voices that hold no sway in this debate, yet are trapped in the middle of it; Individual Creators, trying to make a simple living off their work. And getting screwed from the right and the left.
Previous: «« The Power of Linking ««
Next: »» Ashcroft's Forked Tongue »»
Peanut Gallery


"The main goal of the Internet is to make copies"?? Aaargghh! I can't believe that guy seriously thinks such a thing. What a... goober.
"The main goal of the Internet is to make copies"? Uhh, Andrea, that _was_ the main goal of the world wide web, a simple, easy, and open way for scientists to exchange (i.e. copy) data. The fact that those bits might represent songs that weren't freely redistributable didn't cross anyones mind until quite a bit after (and that wasn't the first surprise, see pr0n for that).
The Internet was designed to allow computer users of all types to view documents on other computers. Yes, as a part of that process, a cached copy is often saved on the viewer's computer. But that copy isn't the point of the transaction, the ability to view the document is. And one key difference, Puff: those scientists were sharing data with each other by choice. There was an agreed and consensual mutual benefit. And if one of them had claimed another was "stealing" his work and using it in a way for which he'd never given given permission, do you think they would have been told "then keep your discoveries on CD's or something, because the Internet gives me a right to copy your work and use it against your wishes"?
No one is stopping you from making money. It is just not as easy as it once was to make money from recorded music. There was a music industry long before there was recorded music. Why the panic? So it is harder to get along without record sales. Your point is? Competitive situations change all the time due to technological change. Nothing is guarenteed. You might want to look into the buggy whip market if music is not so profitable. That is if autos haven't driven them out of business yet. Records were profitable because the capital required to make and distribute them was substantial. That is no longer the case. My condolences. When my job in aerospace comes back I will be sure and buy one of your CDs. I think it will be 10 or 15 years til that market recovers. Don't hold your breath.
With your talk of buggy whips and the loss of your job in the aerospace industry, have you fully translated that to the music business? If the music industry crashes as yours did (or the textile industry, or any number of other examples), the people who are working in it now (in the trenches, not your Madonna or Dave Matthews) will do what you have ... find another way to make a living in another field. What will you download then? Oh, sure, there will still be "music." Just like there is still an "aerospace industry." It will just be a fraction of what it once was, with many of its most ardent talents moving on to other things, and your options as a consumer .... paid or not ... will decrease greatly. In addition to the musicians to whom you say "tough luck," keep in mind the industry itself. These are the people who claimed that videotape would destroy the movie industry. In 1982. Once they got their heads out of their butt, they figured out a way to reap billions from that new medium. Here they are again, faced with a technological revolution. 57 million Americans download music. Rather than extend, embrace, and profit from this new distribution channel, they are threatening to sue their customer base into submission. This, too, will devastate the future of the music industry. So, we have the controllers of an industry (RIAA), and the consumers of that industry (you), all so very concerned about their wallets that the creators of music are getting screwed from both sides. Saying "tough luck" is hardly a solution. But thanks for making my point: keep screwing individual creators (the people who make the music yuou enjoy), and shrugging off their inability to make a living in a "information wants to be free" environment, and very very soon, when it comes to "free music," you'll get exactly the value you pay for.