Three Cheers for Pirates
1.
I just realized why Amazon.com's Kindle sucks (Kindle displays electronic text). It's not just that reading off a screen grates the eyes, and doesn't compete with a paper book. The problem is that they're not really giving you anything. They are respectable pirates who take a cut from the people who actually do the work.
Yar *
Let me explain it like this. Before electronic media, if you wrote a book, you took the pages to a printer, who performed an actual service. He printed several copies of your book. You would either pay the printer to do this, or promise the printer a cut of each of the books sold. The money received for each book was compensation for the time the author took to write it, the time the printer took to print it, and for the paper it was printed on.
"Edward is so dreamy"
*
With electronic books, what is the compensation for? Copying and pasting the texts literally takes no time and no resources. Amazon.com should therefore receive no dollars for their non-effort. You can pay them for the Kindle itself, but all of the books should be free.
I do believe, though, that the artists should be paid for their work. I just think with electronic media, we can cut the middleman out.
And this leads me to pirates. There's a website called The Pirate Bay made by a Swede that allows free downloads of all sorts of electronic media, i.e. music, movies, software.
They are able to provide this service free, which means it costs them nothing to provide it, which means it also costs amazon.com and other companies nothing to provide their electronic media. Back in the day printing a book cost the printer paper, ink, a press, and time. Nowdays electronic media can be copied and replicated effortlessly. Therefore there is no need for a middleman, and most of the proceeds should go to the artist.
But as long as it's okay to rip people off, let's give three cheers to the pirates of Somalia. These guys have hijacked several huge ships, and demanded millions of dollars in ransom. This may seem like brazen lawlessness, but is not far off from what amazon.com, and millions of other respectable businessmen around the world do. They are simply being middlemen.
Grand Theft Awesome
*
It may seem strange that Somali pirates claim ownership of the ocean that borders their country, and demands a shipping fee to cross it. But our European ancestors' idea about ownership of land was also strange to the natives of the Americas. And their capitalistic ideas won out, so perhaps Somali capitalism, with expanded ideas of ownership, will win out. This would be great for those of you who fervently believe in capitalism.
I'm not saying that pirating is okay. I'm saying the opposite. But if it is excusable for people dressed up in suits and ties to rip off workers and artists, then it's okay for pirates.
I know I haven't thought this through well enough. So feel free to stab at the loopholes in my logic.
2.
The second reason I hate the middlemen, is because our arts are proliferated not by the merit of their beauty, but for the probability of their profit. And the guy choosing which music gets played on the radio, made into CDs, and played on MTV; which screenplays get made into movies; and which scripts that get made into books; only cares about profit, not good music or good writing or good art. That's why we listen to Britney Spears. [vomit].
In other words:
"Major labels function with the assumption that 90 percent of artists they sign are going to fail — that should have been a red flag for everybody. I mean that's a bizarre business model in any arena.
But particularly in the cultural arena, the idea that the system through which culture is transmitted is dictated entirely by profit should concern us, because that's going to narrow the types of culture that are transmitted.
And then, on top of that, the alternative venues of distribution are stuck in the shadows of these major labels. So it's not like there's a viable alternative, necessarily, for artists who don't fit into this very narrow range that can become the 10 percent that are profitable and popular."
Guy Hands, Chairman of EMI
*
I just realized why Amazon.com's Kindle sucks (Kindle displays electronic text). It's not just that reading off a screen grates the eyes, and doesn't compete with a paper book. The problem is that they're not really giving you anything. They are respectable pirates who take a cut from the people who actually do the work.
Yar 
"Edward is so dreamy"*
I do believe, though, that the artists should be paid for their work. I just think with electronic media, we can cut the middleman out.
And this leads me to pirates. There's a website called The Pirate Bay made by a Swede that allows free downloads of all sorts of electronic media, i.e. music, movies, software.
They are able to provide this service free, which means it costs them nothing to provide it, which means it also costs amazon.com and other companies nothing to provide their electronic media. Back in the day printing a book cost the printer paper, ink, a press, and time. Nowdays electronic media can be copied and replicated effortlessly. Therefore there is no need for a middleman, and most of the proceeds should go to the artist.But as long as it's okay to rip people off, let's give three cheers to the pirates of Somalia. These guys have hijacked several huge ships, and demanded millions of dollars in ransom. This may seem like brazen lawlessness, but is not far off from what amazon.com, and millions of other respectable businessmen around the world do. They are simply being middlemen.
Grand Theft Awesome*
I'm not saying that pirating is okay. I'm saying the opposite. But if it is excusable for people dressed up in suits and ties to rip off workers and artists, then it's okay for pirates.
I know I haven't thought this through well enough. So feel free to stab at the loopholes in my logic.
2.
The second reason I hate the middlemen, is because our arts are proliferated not by the merit of their beauty, but for the probability of their profit. And the guy choosing which music gets played on the radio, made into CDs, and played on MTV; which screenplays get made into movies; and which scripts that get made into books; only cares about profit, not good music or good writing or good art. That's why we listen to Britney Spears. [vomit].
In other words:
"Major labels function with the assumption that 90 percent of artists they sign are going to fail — that should have been a red flag for everybody. I mean that's a bizarre business model in any arena.
But particularly in the cultural arena, the idea that the system through which culture is transmitted is dictated entirely by profit should concern us, because that's going to narrow the types of culture that are transmitted.
And then, on top of that, the alternative venues of distribution are stuck in the shadows of these major labels. So it's not like there's a viable alternative, necessarily, for artists who don't fit into this very narrow range that can become the 10 percent that are profitable and popular."
"All your culture are belong to us."
Guy Hands, Chairman of EMI*
p.s. If you clicked on the "Britney Spears" up above, the horrifying picture you saw was on the first page of a google image search for "record label."
3.
This section was stolen by pirates.
3.
This section was stolen by pirates.
For some reason, I thought that '3 cheers' would translate to 3 numbered sections. Basically, I want more.
ReplyDelete1. As far as number one goes, I think (and hope) that we'll always have a market for real live books that you can carry around and put on your shelf. I read screens differently than I read books, and I don't like thinking of myself reading my favorite books the way I read on the computer. Besides, I just love the actual artifact in hand—nothing the deckled edges of pretty paper.
2. We talked about this just this morning in my writing class! One of the students bemoaned the fact that writers (or artists in general) can't make it in the field just because they're good; they also have to be profitable in a market which sometimes demands mediocrity. They asked me how to deal with that, and I told them they just kind of had to deal with it. Sigh. I'll never write a best-selling book.
The problems of art versus pulp (sometimes as valid a form of art as respected art itself) are age old. This really isn't anything new.
ReplyDeleteWhat is new is the digital medium of transfer and its associated problems AND benefits.
The model is going to change, somehow or some-way, artists will figure out how to be paid for their art. Really bad artists (Stephanie Meyers) will continue to make millions. Really good artists (Harvey Pekar) will continue to "starve" or scratch by.
Some bad ones will starve too. And some good ones will sell millions themselves.
btw: http://www.harveypekar.com/
first, i've heard the kindle is actually very unlike reading a screen....like the screen looks like paper, and it's easier on the eyes. i've never seen one, but i hesitate to condemn it before trying it.
ReplyDeletesecond, your wife is a writer....you should know there are lots of people who contribute to a finished artistic product than just the artist. there are editors, proofreaders, secretaries, the people doing the copying and pasting you speak of...the ones maintaining all that digital stuff. do artists really want to take care of hiring and paying all those people? or would a middle man continue to make the most sense? if people are only paying for the kindle, the authors would get nothing at all.
third, crappy people aren't successful because people publish them or record them. they are recorded and published because stupid people BUY THEIR CRAP. those companies aren't trying to push crap on the people....the people are begging for the crap. it seems there just aren't as many people who want or will pay for the good stuff, so the talented people will continue to have to watch people like stephanie meyer make it big. so i vote for brain transplants for all! the word verification on this is 'flunbo' and i totally agree. flunbo!