|
Problem with most of this speculation is: You can't assume how much money he's potentially lost, any more than he can. No one can.
But the fact remains, the system as-is likely has cost him money, and to anyone who is trying to make a living, losses have to be a concern.
Also fairness... as he points out later in the article, others try to accept the system by telling artists to go out and "play live, sell T-shirts, etc"... IOW, do twice the amount of work (or more) for the same profit. How many people working for an employer, for example, would be satisfied if their boss told them to do their full-time work for free, then go out and sell umbrellas with the company logo on the street for their income? Not many? Then why should an artist have to do that, just to make a living?
It's a whole new ballgame, the ball is filled with helium, and the gloves have spikes on the fingertips. I feel for Pogue in that he is being put in the position of the companies he often ridicules, the music industry, in trying to figure out how to quantify his losses and deal with piracy. But he isn't being given too many choices, nor much support from the public, for his efforts to make a living... so can you really blame him? His concerns are legitimate, and shouldn't be dismissed as lightly as they tend to be by consumers (and some MR members).
|