RE: Net publication of Jewish Music Conference papers, London 2000

[Ed Sieb <sieb...>]

on   August 03, 2000 6:29 PM, Brian Dichter wrote:

> ... But, how does the one-time fee protect the original producer from
> inappropriate use of the commodity? There are those who will purchase
> one legitimate copy and dupe it 10 or a 100 or 10,000 times. How can
> that be accounted for and built into the price?
<snip>

A good point. My original contention focused more on academic and
research material and the written word, rather than recorded music.
My original idea was that someone who legitimately purchased a copy
of the work at a suitable price, would be loath to copy it for nothing.  My
(rather naive) assumption was that the users/purchasers of the work would
be honest consumers, with only an academic or aesthetic interest in the
work.  I wasn't actually thinking of pirates and thieves.

In any case, piracy and theft will always be with us. No matter how an
original  creative work is  priced, if there is enough demand for it, it
will be
stolen.

> Isn't anything subject to being uncontrolled and liberated? Most people
> think that when they buy a CD or software, they "own" the contents and
> feel free to liberate it. What incentive is there to prevent this?

Here, my original assumption was that only the original producer of the
work
could legitimately "liberate" his own work, by making it available free.
Anyone
else trying this would be a thief.

The original producer, or title-holder can either resort to technological
means
to protect the work from theft, or price it low enough  that there is no
point in
stealing it; the "pirate" would be in competition with the original
producer.
In any case this issue is one which organizations bigger and smarter than
me,
have their hands full at this time (RIAA, etc),  and I'll leave it them to
figure out
an equitable solution.

There are many example of musicians thwarting piracy, by allowing both
recording of their music, and copying for non-commercial dissemination.
The two most famous examples are the Grateful Dead and the Allman Bros.
There are other groups,  mostly the "jam-bands", (Phish, et al) who also
allow
this. On the other side of the coin, there are those ultra-commercial
groups, i.e.
Metallica,  etc. who are opposed to this, and are fighting tooth and nail.
It is
interesting to note the level of enthusiasm and  fan devotion engendered by
these different groups. Though I am a staunch free-market Libertarian, I
view
the efforts of Metallica and other bands of that ilk with disgust. While
they
claim to be defending the interests of musicians in protecting their work,
their
real motivation is nothing less than unbridled naked greed.
[OK, ok....  I confess.... I'm a Deadhead too, but that has nothing to do
with it,
I swear!!!  :-)   ]

Hey Now!, ... er, I mean...

A guten Shabbos,

Ed Sieb

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+