Re: [LAU] ASCAP Assails Free-Culture, Digital-Rights Groups

On Thursday 01 July 2010 08:59:19 Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> On 07/01/2010 10:51 PM, drew Roberts wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 June 2010 13:38:39 you wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:28 PM, drew Roberts<zotz@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> >>> So, you think that the before and at options are not viable?
> >>
> >> i don't believe that the before or at options are viable for the
> >> overwhelming majority of artists& creatives. i think that "before/at"
> >> can probably work for programmers working on contract work.
> >
> > I think it is worth some serious experimenting and efforts on the before
> > and at phases to see what we can come up with before we discount them out
> > of hand.
> >
> > Anyone else interested?
> >
> >>>> i'm fine (to some extent) with the conclusion that we, as a society,
> >>>> no longer wish to pay artists& creatives to do what they do. but if
> >>>> that's really going to be the conclusion, we'd better think very
> >>>> carefully about all the side effects. i'm not sure its pretty, and it
> >>>> may be even less pretty than the world in which disney and sonny bono
> >>>> get everything they ask for.
> >>>
> >>> This I seriously doubt. Putting someone off the internet for *being
> >>> accused* of violating copyright three times is way over the top.
> >>
> >> its certainly awful, as are your other examples.
> >
> > And getting worse.
> >
> >> on the other hand, i'm not sure quite how the mixture of easy
> >> distribution via the net but almost no paid compensation for most
> >> artistic work would compare the situation we've had for on the order
> >> of 100 years, in which it was feasible for quite a lot of artists to
> >> make a living by being artists.
> >
> > Let's brainstorm and run some experiments and see what we can learn and
> > document it for everyone.
> >
> > One new thought I just had was making early access the thing you charge
> > for. People can pay to be the first to have your new hit.
>
> You/We would need a credible following first. Maybe we can get a
> subscription to LAM going but it would probably only be a trickle of <
> $100 per month at the moment.

Indeed. The person will need to get some bang for their buck.
>
> > For those able and willing to perform. A world without collection
> > societies might/should free up more money on the part of the venue folks
> > to pay to the performers.
>
> Highly unlikely the performers would se the money. Venues tend to make
> most of their profits on drinks not tickets. Tickets usually go someway
> towards paying for the cost of the venue, staff, marketing, artists,
> travel, accomodation, etc... The rest is covered by sponsors if you are
> lucky but usually only in kind and not with cash payments.

From what I have been hearing there are venues that no longer have live bands
supposedly because of the CS costs. So there you might have more venues to
play at and then more exposure.

For those currently doing the live bands, that would be money not being paid
out. Since the bands know this they can ask for a cut.

Alternately, depending on the band and their willingness to accept risk, they
can perhaps make a deal to get the door and do their own promotion and sink
or swim based on the results of their promotion.

all the best,

drew
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Thu, 1 Jul 2010 10:50:17 -0400