Sometimes the hypocrite in me rises to the surface.
Anyone that knows me will tell you that I am disgusted by the clueless, greed-fueled machinations of the RIAA, MPAA, and any other acronym that purports to support artists. These organizations support nothing but the lining of their own pockets and never gave a rat turd about anyone else. The majority of recording artists end up as indentured servants to their record label, and most actors are still working at Del Taco (note: I know nothing about Del Taco. I have never even seen a Del Taco. But I have a friend who once lived in Hollywood and always talked up Del Taco, so now I look like I’m in the know. Hip!).
If you think that a record contract or a bit part in a film equals cavier and gold dildos, you couldn’t be more wrong. For every Mick Jagger, there are thousands of high school dropouts that never made a dime from their “art” (Jesus, I hate that term). You just rarely hear about the sad stories.
I am tired of DRM, lawsuits, and the constant whining. Digital entertainment is here to stay. You cannot micromanage every single aspect of its dissemination. File sharing will only continue to grow and I, for one, am happy that the proverbial ball is now in the court of the consumer. I will fully admit to supporting the Pirate Bay and thank the Minutemen/DCP crew for keeping me entertained during these depressing Winter months. So, you see, I do not support “intellectual rights” at all, right?
Wrong. I absolutely support the rights of the creators, but they are partly to blame for getting ripped off- they signed the deals, after all. Sure, they may have been naive, but ignorance is no excuse. Do I have an answer for all of this? No. If I did, I would be a very rich man. However, it is obvious that new business models must be created to survive in this modern age.
So why am I writing this? Well, I was on Doom9.net this afternoon (further proving my hypocrisy), reading about the McCreevy Initiative (in the 2/11 news) to extend copyright protection to 90 years. The author, staunchly against said initiative, throws out this little nugget:
“Nobody should be worth a lifetime of guaranteed income, period!”
From what I gather, it is the author’s belief that copyright law should cover 15 years, after which said rights should go to the public domain. Basically, creators should not be able to sit on their lazy asses and collect fat checks for works created over 15 years ago. Doom9 also attempts the absurd comparison between writing a song and discovering the cure for cancer, and claims it is “fact” that “the ideal duration of protection is 15 years”. This is based on, I would surmise, the writings of grad student Rufus Pollock, which you can read about here. Please note that many grad students also like to wear hemp necklaces and play Hacky Sack.
These viewpoints almost always come from people that have never sat on their bedroom floor all night, trying to write a decent tune. That have never played in a shitty dive bar until 3am, only to have to be at work in 4 hours (and get paid nothing for their time). Just as the talking heads of the RIAA and MPAA like to get on their soapboxes and preach about how they’re fighting the good fight, so do the geeks on the other side, who think building their own PC entitles (and I stress entitles) them to a lifetime of free entertainment.
Four score and seven years ago, this shit was bangin', son!
Don’t forget that public domain does not just equal free tunes for you- it also means any song you love can and will be the next Pepsi commercial. Guns N Roses’ “It’s So Easy” will be selling tampons. Slayer’s “Dead Skin Mask” to sell Toyotas? Sure! It also means a fact that everyone conveniently omits- eventually, there will be a lot less music to hear. There will be even less movies to choose from, as they cost a small fortune.
“Well, they shouldn’t be doing it for the money anyway!” Yes, I agree, to some extent. My band is in the middle or recording an album right now. We will be releasing it ourselves. Why? Well, for starters, no one else has offered. But I also just love playing music and being able to control how the music is released. Is it my goal to make millions from this record? That would be nice, but no. My goal is to put out some great rock n roll. My other goal is to not lose money.
There has to be some middle ground in this whole retarded battle. Yes, artists should be compensated for their creations. Yes, even the movie studio fat cats should get a return on their investment (though major recording labels are dead and should remain so). But the punishment should fit the crime- $5 CDs, $7 DVDs, 25 cent music downloads. Charging $18 for a CD is criminal, as is charging $10 for an album download.
On the other side of the equation, “Nobody should be worth a lifetime of guaranteed income, period!” smacks of Socialism. As casually as that term is tossed around by right wingnuts, that is exactly how it sounds.
Like I said, I do not claim to have all the answers. I love living in an age where information is so free and abundant. I love having my entire record collection in a tiny hand held device. I also know that people busted their asses to make it so. File sharing will continue to flourish and I think it is a good thing. Having almost every song and movie ever created made available in a few clicks is great- but I don’t think I am entitled to it.
Note: I support Doom9.net and find it a great source for information on DVD backups. While I often agree with what is stated on the site, I found the above blanket statement to be a short-sighted, kneejerk reaction. Also note that I am a hypocrite, as stated previously.
