On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 03:10, Christian Einfeldt wrote:

> > Of much more important to everyone is personal ownership. People
> > think they own that itunes song they purchased, but they don't.
> > They are just renting it.

Which is a bit like us saying that if you buy an INGOT certificate and
lose it you have to buy another. Ok, it costs a couple of dollars for
the official certification process, we have to make the scheme
commercially viable (going back to your earlier points) but since the
candidate has paid for registration why shouldn't they be free to print
as many copies of *their* certificate as they want to? 

> So the notion that Apple can rent and re-rent the same damn songs 
> honks me off.  It lacks balance between monetizing the distribution 
> of creativity (musicians gotta eat, too) and sharing culture.  
> IMHO, Creative Commons, Magnatunes, and MP3tunes achieve a better 
> balance. 

I'm writing a set of lesson plans for the Bronze INGOT. It will take me
a just a few days. It will be Creative Commons because it will encourage
take up of the certification and with an efficient business model we
don't have to charge for things that really cost very little to produce
and distribute when the whole size of the market is considered. This is
why the licensed mode for software is inefficient from the consumers
point of view. You get into the situation that large scale customers pay
more in license fees than the entire development cost of the product!

>  Buy them albums, or you're not gonna get any 
> more music.  Bah humbug.

How many Elton Johns, Stings or Bon Jovis are there out there and
undiscovered? I bet thousands, and these are some of the really talented
ones. My kids can do better than a lot of the crap out there promoted by
the record companies. So the Emperor really has no clothes. There are
oodles of good musicians who do it just for the love of it. It just
takes one Internet based distributor to get popular on selling unlimited
use for say 10% cost of current albums giving the artist the same return
as they get now from the current record companies and watch all the
artists flock to the new label.

> Some artists will give 
> their music away for free.  Some artists are gonna take the risk 
> that it makes more sense to side with the big record labels and 
> take a chance on becoming Metallica millionaires, but most of them 
> will get ground into dust.  

Its only a matter of time before an internet distributor has a Metallica
on its hands. In fact its likely to be big simply because more people
will buy the stuff if its low cost. It could easily become a fashion for
young kids. Pirate radio, underground music etc are part of the culture.

Goodnight RIAA :-)
-- 
Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ZMS Ltd

Reply via email to