> >see, what will happen if we go down that route is that these MP3s will >just go straight onto p2p and the label/shop/outlet >will make no money. > >so the logical next step is what M$ are doing with digital rights >management which is a way of stopping you using a computer for what you >want to do with it....(whose rights are being 'managed') but does >provide a way to stop these things going further than your machine. > >aaargh.... > >at least with vinyl you don't get this, one reason why i suspect it >won't go away in a hurry. > >robin... > I suppose in that sense the 'obscurist'* ethos (?) of this music has it's advantages. In that way, p2p 'piracy' will be limited, as the music won't be attractive to people who think that p2p is a legitimate means of acquisition, whilst at the same time, people like us, if we like the music, will be prepared to pay for vinyl versions because that's basically a part of our culture - it's not something which we do with a heavy heart and try to avoid at the first technological opportunity, rather we do it because we enjoy it. (Limited amount of genuine interest is a double-edged sword of course.)
k ____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ *An example of this might be the names and titles used by artists, labels etc. An ostensibly offensive name or title, immediately puts off the average dilatente, but it won't dissuade people like ourselves: examples: the Shitkatapult label. Also I've seen recently a label selling some remastered and re-edited underground '70s disco - called c***t records! I swear that's true! That's an extreme example though, but a good one! :-) k
