Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_mchale
We are not talking about art unknown outside a particular group, we are talking about art not created at all. How much poorer would the world have been if 90% of all the novels written in the last 200 years never been published or even ever written?
How much poorer will our culture be in 200 years than it could be if we make sure that artists continue to have a chance of making a living off of their work.
|
Not measurably poorer, I would guess. Whether or not others would have taken their place. What makes you think otherwise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_mchale
And how many other people who develop copyrighted work (Like software engineers) will not bother if they can't be compensated for their work.
|
None?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_mchale
In any case, regardless of how the world should be, the way it is is simple. Artists have a reasonable expectation, one assured by law, that if they produce a work and people want to use that work, that they have a right to be paid for the use of that work. File sharing is breaking that social contract.
|
The psychotic lengths to which both the law, as well as the the artists and their representation go to ensure that this--by no means natural--right is respected is entirely new and modern. I've no calms about seeing it go along with the next Hemingway, Beatles, and 200 years worth of upcoming genius artists and writers.
There's several lifetimes', if not centuries', worth of good stuff out there we are yet to discover... primarily because it was not written/made/discovered/appreciated by the rich elderly white men of olden days.
- Ahi