PopcornTi.me is down
popcornti.me
popcornti.me
This is why people are throwing rocks at Google buses: the idea that computer technology is working to create a world where only programmers can get paid.
I used to be on this "information wants to be free" bandwagon, but then I met some actual artists. Lots of things "want" to happen. Nuclear power plants "want" to melt down, dams "want" to break, influenza "wants" to spread, etc. That doesn't mean it's always in our best interest to allow the default second law of thermodynamics thing to occur. There must be some mechanism in our economy for artists and the people who support them to get paid, otherwise you can kiss anything but the most trite (read: cheap to produce) pop music and plotless explosion-fest movies goodbye. That's because that stuff appeals to people who are either too young or too dumb to know how to pirate.
If people can't get paid to pursue their dreams, they have to shelve their dreams in order to get paid. Then you have one less author, one less musician, one less movie being made.
I'm not sure pop music is cheap to produce (compare the tech work and marketing and all involved in a band playing at your local venue with that at a ... um... Taylor Swift? is she still a pop star? concert), and "plotless explosion-fest movies" tend to be the most expensive movies - "2012" and "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" each cost 13 times as much as "The King's Speech".
"If people can't get paid to pursue their dreams, they have to shelve their dreams in order to get paid. Then you have one less author, one less musician, one less movie being made."
Most authors and musicians already do something else in order to get paid.
'Nuclear power plants "want" to melt down, dams "want" to break, influenza "wants" to spread, etc.'
When those things happen, hundreds or thousands or millions of people are harmed. When information spreads, hundreds or thousands or millions of people are enriched. We should find another way of rewarding artists than fighting an uphill battle to constrain value.
Trust me: if such a thing were found, every single artist would be all ears. Solve this problem and you're the next Zuckerberg.
Non-solutions include artists having to rely on charity, "they'll just make money touring," tip jars, DRM, and micro payments (unless they can be made incredibly seamless and low-friction).
But making an app specifically designed and targeted so as to impoverish artists is a dick move.
'Non-solutions include artists having to rely on charity, "they'll just make money touring," tip jars, DRM, and micro payments (unless they can be made incredibly seamless and low-friction)."
I'm working on it.
"But making an app specifically designed and targeted so as to impoverish artists is a dick move."
We have a commons for a reason. If I read "A Tale Of Two Cities" instead of "Twilight", I'm impoverishing artists - and artists can fucking suck it up.
Changing the subject.
The german GEMA manages artists rights and is huge. They have the means to compensate artists whos works got fileshared. RIAA and others are already tracking the p2p-networks, companies like BigChampagne earn money with what is downloaded where exactly to optimize marketing.
If we would install a monthly culture flatrate, we have a win win.
The whole lot is a mess of creative work being stolen, but not only by pirates.
True. But recording industries and publishing houses screw over artists and pay them shite, while piracy pays them nothing at all. This is not a step in the right direction.
I can use my phone to unlock a large number of cars within a few blocks of me and drive wherever I want.
Unless, of course, Zipcar et al now have free accounts, right?
EDIT: switched words (nothing/little and only/mostly) to avoid absolutes.
Out of curiosity, do you support banning all guns, too? Because clearly people are dying because of them.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wbp576ynkmnlnlj/Screenshot%202014-...
There is a world of difference between the torrent protocol and this.
I expect this to happen in my lifetime, and people will look back on these days as a dark-ages where information was controlled and entertainment was not on a donation-only basis.
Copyright is like debt-collectors, the system only continues to operate because people keep paying. The sooner we all stop paying for content, the quicker the system will go away.
How do you suggest content creation be funded? Or do you think content should only be created by hobbyists for fun?
So you're willing to do your work on a donation-only basis then? Have fun paying the rent, raising kids, getting health care, and saving for retirement.
I don't see why anyone wouldn't be, provided the donations were sufficient. Of course, that is unfortunately unlikely to be the case with the current setup for a number of reasons.
There have been artists that have made money off donations before -- Trent Reznor and Radiohead come to mind -- but these are huge artists. If they release something on a donation basis and 0.00001% of people donate, they do pretty well. Only a tiny fraction of the top 1% of artists can do this.
Existing approaches to Coordinated donations (KickStarter/IndieGoGo) do better than uncoordinated but not better enough.
I didn't really expect you to disagree, was just trying to clarify.