Quote:
Originally Posted by spindlegirl
I agree with Elfwreck above, Yes, I was able to scrape together the money on birthday and christmas to get e-readers (my husband now has the former one I had). But I was counting on the reader to "pay for itself" via all the free material I am able to download. (Gutenberg, MR, the library, feedbooks, Smashwords, etc).
Much like my digital camera pays for itself in that I don't have to buy and process film, and I can afford to snap all kinds of crappy photos and then delete them if I don't like them. I use my e-reader the same way, download the cheap/free stuff, use library loans.
It's not a contradiction in terms to own a computer/e-reader etc, and have a modest budget to "feed" these devices.
|
In follow up to this, musician and copyright defender David Lowery posted this in the middle of an epic rant on musician's rights:
Quote:
The existential questions that your generation gets to answer are these:
Why do we value the network and hardware that delivers music but not the music itself?
Why are we willing to pay for computers, iPods, smartphones, data plans, and high speed internet access but not the music itself?
Why do we gladly give our money to some of the largest richest corporations in the world but not the companies and individuals who create and sell music?
This is a bit of hyperbole to emphasize the point. But it’s as if:
Networks: Giant mega corporations. Cool! have some money!
Hardware: Giant mega corporations. Cool! have some money!
Artists: 99.9 % lower middle class. Screw you, you greedy bastards!
Congratulations, your generation is the first generation in history to rebel by unsticking it to the man and instead sticking it to the weirdo freak musicians!
|
LINK
Substitute" authors" for "ebooks" and you pretty much get the same attitude here: we'll pay real money to Sony, Apple, Samsung, and Comcast, but authors? No money for you. Beyond the budget.