Apple Logic Pro /LogicExpress Discussion

On Jan 5, 2005, at 4:48 AM, GAmoore@... wrote:

> >As for the artists, I've not seen any one of
>  >them attend the grammy's looking like he stepped out of a
>  >refrigerator box located on homeless avenue and onto the red carpet.
>
>  If I am invited to the grammy's I'll get rid of my washing machine 
> box and rent a tuxedo too.
>
>  >When I purchase something, it's mine!
>
>  I don't have any beef with intellectual property rights, but if you 
> think about it, we don't pay royalties every time we tell a joke that 
> someone wrote, or follow a recipe that someone came up with.

That's easy.  Because few of us get paid to tell the joke so there is 
in fact nothing to be paid to the guy who wrote it from any but a small 
number of joke tellers and in fact the few who do get paid to tell 
jokes do pay the joke writers quite well, and the use of recipe's is 
not only  too hard to track but most recipes  are ancient anyway.  
Recipe *books* on the other hand can be, and damned well are, protected 
by copyrights just like any other book.

> But if we gave all of our music away, we could not make a living.

Right, that is how some of us make our living's.  If it was how you 
made your living you would not have any difficulty with the concept.  
But it seems you do have some difficulty with the concept so you talk 
about UBIK or whoever's beautiful mind because he thinks the world 
would be a better place if I simply gave away my work instead of 
insisting on getting paid for it.  I work hard at what I do and I have 
spent 30 years honing my abilities. Sometimes my work is fun but not 
always, most of the time it is just plain work and it is *my* work.

I never have seen what is so beautiful about people who want to be 
generous with *other people's* property.

I mean I do not know how you make your living but if you do it by for 
example delivering papers, how would you feel if some "beautiful mind" 
suggested you should not be getting the credit (and therefore the 
money) for delivering those papers?  I mean after all, bascially all 
you are doing is taking a walk around the neighborhood and getting some 
fresh air and exercise and lots of people see getting fresh air and 
exercise as leisure activity so why should you get paid for what they 
see as a leisure activity?   Why do you have to be so greedy?  Why 
don't you just deliver papers for the satisfaction of delivering 
papers?


La La La, I have such a fucking beautiful mind I just want to cut my 
skull open and stare at it in the mirror every day...


> mabey if the record industry didn't take such an outrageous share of 
> the
>  revenue, it wouldn't be such an issue.

The problem is distribution and if you know how the system of CD 
distribution works it stops looking quite as outrageous what record 
companies take.  Not to say that they don't screw artists just not as 
much as it seems at first glance.

At first blush the possibilities opened up by internet distribution 
would seemingly change all that instantly  but:

>  A few months ago they asked Prince about his return to releasing 
> commerical CD's as opposed to self-releasing stuff on his website,  
> implying it was a failure because it only sold 200,000. He laughed and 
> said he made more money from those releases than he did fom the big 
> commercial releases which sold millions. Now an artist like Prince is 
> going to get the most favorable terms compared to some new unknown 
> act.

So why has he gone back to commercial releases?

I am willing to bet it is because he reaches more people that way and 
in order for him to make the kind of money he did with is independent 
internet releases he has to be a big famous star and to maintain that 
status he has to  feed the record industry promotional monster or else 
gradually trade in his superstar status and fade into "has been land".

The problem here is that distribution while being a *vital* component 
of the big picture, is not and never was the *only* component of it.

The internet is in the process of changing the way the whole thing 
works but, some important aspects will stay the same for a long time to 
come.

>  Hey, I think one of us can make millions by organizing a new music 
> system where we all sell online, and people can browse by genre and so 
> forth, and have connections to radio stations which play these - like 
> MusicChoice does on cable radio. Of course, the record companies and 
> music stores and Amazons will suffer, but more musicians will release 
> music, and more people will hear the music they want to hear.

Read what you wrote again.  You are not talking about getting justice.  
You are talking about "one of us" simply taking over the same position 
that you are blasting the record companies for.  And you are talking 
about somebody "making millions" managing intellectual property that 
you previously were applauding some "beautiful mind" for suggesting the 
artists should be giving away.  For me that really sums up what irks me 
about this discussion "one of us" should be making millions on 
distribution (or whatever), while the artists "should be giving it 
away".