An article at The Register on what recorded music is really worth. Personally, I didn’t bother sitting through the videos, just went straight to reading the comments, where I added this:
My Comment:
The analogies don’t work for either side, for or against. An extra digital copy doesn't cost anything to produce, doesn't deprive anyone of anything and copy 1 000 is just as good as copy number 1. In short, music has lost its scarcity value through being so easy to replicate and it is that - simple supply and demand - that controls the price.
Last I heard, the world wasn't suffering from a global shortage of pop stars - if anything there is a glut. If they were still working in a factory instead of being pop stars and their factory was no longer producing what people wanted to buy then no-one would suggest we keep paying them to produce their widgets. They are not owed a living just because they style themselves as 'artists'. I write poetry - I rarely get paid for it when it gets published (and then only trivial amounts), but then I know that and accept it and know that I'm highly unlikely to do it for a living, but I carry on because... well, that is what I do.
I haven't heard of that many rock stars giving it all up and getting a job cleaning windows or whatever recently either. So, they should consider themselves lucky that anyone at all is ready to spend their hard-earned money on the outpourings of pop stars.
If every tunesmith in the world just gave up tomorrow, how long do you think it would be before we all crawled to their doors dragging bags of gold begging for just one more tune? I think it would be a very long time - perhaps instead we'd all learn how to whistle instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment