Legalized Music (cds, vinyl, itunes, albums, fan)

Pilgrim · 05-26-2006, 01:30 PM

Free downloading has become something known and almost accepted, at this point. The problem is that this obsession with the idea that ' it's my music, so you can't have it for free' is, in my mind, reasonable - after all, if you've done the work (making the music), why can't you get paid?

At the same time, controlling this media is likely to become incredibly difficult. People don't want to pay for what they don't have to. But if no one pays for music, how can the artists, who work so hard to make it, survive? Might music be relegated to a hobby only?

I've heard the argument that people can get paid for concerts - after all, they didn't pay for the CD's to be made - but I can't help but feel that if someone who invents something should get a fair share of it, someone who writes music should.

Which brings me to the idea of MMO-type services, where you'd pay ten dollars a month to access as many songs as you like. A la Napster or Itunes. Napsterlinks-type extras are a bonus, and both of the services would need a lot more variety in their databases but...

And this is good and fine, until you realize that the artist is getting essentially none of this money. Less than 10%. Less than the label, less than the site.

This isn't right.

But how can it be changed?

05-26-2006, 01:30 PM	#1 (permalink)
Pilgrim Groupie Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 30	Legalized Music Free downloading has become something known and almost accepted, at this point. The problem is that this obsession with the idea that ' it's my music, so you can't have it for free' is, in my mind, reasonable - after all, if you've done the work (making the music), why can't you get paid? At the same time, controlling this media is likely to become incredibly difficult. People don't want to pay for what they don't have to. But if no one pays for music, how can the artists, who work so hard to make it, survive? Might music be relegated to a hobby only? I've heard the argument that people can get paid for concerts - after all, they didn't pay for the CD's to be made - but I can't help but feel that if someone who invents something should get a fair share of it, someone who writes music should. Which brings me to the idea of MMO-type services, where you'd pay ten dollars a month to access as many songs as you like. A la Napster or Itunes. Napsterlinks-type extras are a bonus, and both of the services would need a lot more variety in their databases but... And this is good and fine, until you realize that the artist is getting essentially none of this money. Less than 10%. Less than the label, less than the site. This isn't right. But how can it be changed?