If the record companies can point to the hole in their inventory where the file I (hypothetically) got USED to be, I'll confess to theft.
Oh, but wait. Are they talking about not getting a hypothetical $0.99 for something that cost them $0.00 to produce? Sorry, I'm just a dumb boy who doesn't find the theft in this. Especially since the hypothetical track sucked so bad. They wouldn't have given me my $0.99 back, would they?
Re: Re: Re: I wrote this but it got moderated (maybe it is nonsense?)
Good alt. taste there. Gillian Welch, Sara Jarosz...these aren't really the people most filesharers and music labels are talking about, but they are people who would never have gotten a penny from me sans filesharing.
As a proof-of-concept, I obtained the entire Welch/Rawlings back catalog (before Harrow and the Harvest, which I did purchase) and then sent them money...and I figure it was more money than they would have received if I had bought two copies of every album. So...am I a pirate, Mr. Lowery?? If so, I'm comfortable with the fact that I haven't hurt, by my piracy, the people who produce the music I like to listen to.
Should it be our goal, in structuring media distribution, to ensure that "artists" (many of whom make crappy, totally derivative, unoriginal noise, by my own standards) all make a million dollars. I, for one, will not be sad to see rock stars with enough money to pay for totally trashing hotels at every stop, and to buy enough drugs to short circuit their own productivity.
More importantly, should it be the goal of any real "artist" to achieve the rarified level of "ROCK SUPERSTAR" and multi-millionaire?? Because that's been the carrot the labels have used for years. Not "we'll help you make your music, promote it and you'll make some money" but "we'll take all your contract bonus in recording and A&R fees, neglect to promote your music and pay you a pittance per sale BUT!! You MIGHT become Led Zeppelin!"
Oh dear, another one that didn't get the memo? You didn't see it? It was, like, a piece of paper, with a bold header!
What did it say? Ummm..."getting an education and then taking a job you're overqualified for". I think that was it. Part of it, yeah. And you won't get 'rich' but the work will be easy and you'll still have a lifestyle that kings from 200 years ago would kill for. "Lowered expectations..." Yeah.
Sometimes it seems, at least over the last few years, that "fame" is the only criteria for being on TV or in movies, and "greater fame" the only goal. I mean, when getting a role on a 3rd tier reality show because you were once 2rd runner up in a Bachelorette series is considered a "career in show business", it's clear that fame is the only currency...not talent, not the ability to actually, you know, DO something, but only 'being known'. I mean, born with enough money to do anything she wanted, Paris Hilton could think of no higher goal than to become famous.
It's a weird phenomenon, but perhaps Carreon is convinced that becoming more famous is an unalloyed good.