Quote:
Originally Posted by innerspaceboy
But what I find more confusing is your description of artists who sell exclusively digital content. How does that exist? How does anyone control valued digital goods? It would require the suppression of their inherent and fundamental qualities of being infinitetly replicable and being distributed at zero-cost. I ask this as an honest question because it defies any reasonable understanding of digital goods.
|
First off, digital goods are not distributed at zero-cost. For starters, the content itself required time and money to make. Secondly, uploading that content to the internet requires an internet connection, as well as a website that you either pay to host yourself or pay to list things on (either directly or through ad revenue). Just because it is easier than ever to get your work out there, does not mean that the work itself magically appeared out of nowhere and took no effort to make or sustain, and that the artist spent no money trying to get their work noticed. While making a copy of your work is quick, easy and can even be self-automated, this isn't a bad thing. It's a
good thing. People are able to acquire content with the touch of a button, and can make content without the burden of taking up physical space, in a world that is already burdened with landfills filled with CDs and records. More people are able to access more content than ever before, and they are given the opportunity to pay a fair price for it without a corporate entity taking a massive cut. Sure, some services still screw their artists, but for every Itunes there's a Bandcamp.
The truth is, the digital age has made it easier than ever for artists to sell things directly to their fanbase, and while a middle ground of distribution does still largely exist, there is increasingly less need for a
massive and expensive corporate middle ground. Poor kids no longer need to put themselves in debt by paying studios all they've got just to get access to decent equipment, no longer need to join a big label to be marketed outside of their local area, or have a company press records for them so that anyone can hear their work at all. They still can if they want, but the key is that they don't
have to. The digital age is the age of the creator-consumer, a person who can create and consume massive quantities of content with minimal corporate intervention. People can get paid to do what the love, and pay
others to do what they
love. How fu
cking awesome is that?! This is the utopia you've been dreaming about your whole life, and instead of supporting it, you've been leeching off of it while s
hitting on it, very much like the corporate suits you claim to hate. You simply take what you want, and expect people to keep making it for you like good little drones.
Whether or not digital goods take up space is irrelevant, they still have a value. Their value is in the experience. You yourself gain enjoyment from digital goods. They entertain and inspire you. You protect them with massive servers, showing that you are afraid of losing them, of losing the time and effort that it took to acquire them. Yet, though you're willing to pay for an artisinal lamp that makes you happy, you're not wiling to pay for a digital song that makes you happy, just because it doesn't have a resell value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by innerspaceboy
Does Apple still sell music? If so, how have they maintained that preposterous platform? It is absolutely impossible to capitalize on digital goods. This was effectively demonstrated with the complete failure of streaming services to generate a positive cashflow for over 90% of the artists whose content they streamed. This was further demonstrated by the end of the software industry. Adobe adapted to this realization by switching to subscription-based software which a small percentage of lesser-informed individuals still pay for on a monthly basis. (Much like we've seen with cable subscriptions.) It really makes no sense at all.
|
Wow, a big company got cocky and greedy and fu
cked up. That's never happened before. Like I said, for every Itunes, there's a Bandcamp, Spotify or a Pandora. Just because some big companies of yore are having trouble adapting doesn't mean that it's impossible for
anyone to adapt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by innerspaceboy
But do not misinterpret my intention. Artists deserve to be compensated for their works. They contribute a vital asset to the cultural economy. I don't know of any digital-only artists but you've expressed that they exist and they too would deserve compensation. As there is no way to control the distribution of digital goods, many have opted for the PWYW model which has worked well for many artists.
|
You're right. Artists deserve to be compensated for their work. Not the packaging of their work, but the work itself. Dude, you're on a website
filled with artists who release music digitally. Yorkedaddy alone has released enough digital music to sink a digital ship. Yes, some ask for a set amount of money, others let the consumer decide what to pay, and others even give out their music for free. But to steal from all of them is to screw the ones that really could have used the humble amount they were asking for. They have bills to pay. Ideally maybe they shouldn't, maybe one day we can all live in a world where people no longer need the consensual hallucination of the inherently worthless rags called dollars, but right now they do. That's just the reality of the world we're living in at this moment. Even if you just give them a few bucks, money is money, and it adds up. If they make music that makes you happy, why not pay them for the experience? Just because something doesn't have a re-sell value doesn't mean that it wasn't worth supporting. For a guy who loves marxism, you sure have a capitalistic point of view.
I don't get you. You claim to love music, but in the end you'd rather pay insane amounts of money for inherently worthless pieces of plastic, rather than pay a humble amount to get the music itself without bells and whistles. You'd rather pay hundreds to a re-seller, fueling the capitalistic middle ground you claim to despise, rather than give just one dollar to someone who wants to inject their music directly into your mind? Just admit it, you love owning physical things, despise investing in something without a clear return, and believe that the world of digital goods is yours to exploit simply because it's easy to steal things without consequences. This is the capitalist mindset, the corporate ambition. Embrace it if you want, but don't pretend that you're some gallant knight of the people in the meantime.