Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Blaming others when they don't gets tired. That's what I'm reading here.
Then you're reading it wrong
I'm not blaming anyone simon, i'm pointing out how it actually is in contradiction to what you want it to be like. you say I offer no proof, yet I give you first hand accounts.
grass roots, ground level, reality.
not good enough for you? -
George Harrison was asked once about The Jam's Start, which borrowed heavily from Taxman. Was he pissed off? His response was something like "but it's such a great song". I guess he could afford it
you poisoned your own well there simon.
-
I think you're talking absolute tosh.
come on simon, you know full well that there's a lot of manipulation and scheming in the 'art' of a hit record.
its got fuck all to do with being good, so I think you're full of tosh (what ever that is) with your point scoring on who's the most indie cred in the modern world.
I've got no problem with you doing what you do now, its how you earn a living and I don't begrudge anyone that, just don't tell me I'm a corporate whore and you're mr street cred to try and discredit my argument.Mr stowells tied in with all the dirty rough and starving music types of chch and port chalmers, are you going to say that he's fighting for the mega corps too?
lets remember that the supposed 'underdogs' in the whole sp2a thing were telecommunications companies fighting the corporate evils of .....APRA????. how confused can you make this picture.
-
come on simon, you know this is going to end in another dramatic exit. I suppose we can fit one more in before the turn of the centenium?
What rock and a bloody hard place.
there you go proving my point for me. (one sided, zero empathy, cartoon portray)
do you not see the difficulty in being asked to unlock copy protection for some?And yet pretty much everything I've read from you here paints you as a flag waver, rather unquestioningly so too. I think you very much advocate business over a live and vibrant art, much more than me.
see on the one hand you criticise these big businesses and on the other hand you're in with them, taking your publishing cut and making deals with em, that's just plain confusing. You're going to have to work pretty hard to prove you're the indie underdog and I'm the corporate whore here.
I am a bleeding heart, pompous artsy fuck. look it up in the dictionary, its got my name listed next to it.I think you very much advocate business over a live and vibrant art, much more than me.
well then you've misunderstood me,
I make the distinction between losing money/pay to play and fairly covering your costs because I can see first hand how the failure to achieve the later limits the vibrance and longevity of the art.
look around you man, all those people you worked with in the 70's and 80's. day jobs, no art, half of what they could achieve lost.I also see that rules that apply for the big boys also have a ripple effect for the people further down. you seem to be prepared to chop of the big boys noses to spite the face of everyone.
I'm not bitter about not getting the deal I wanted with some major player, and I don't begrudge them making a profit in the market place so long as they don't fuck with what I'm doing.
They're presently not fucking with anything I'm doing, but arguing for the devaluation of stand alone media is. asking me to pick up 50% of nothing on t-shirt sales is, asking me to have faith in a system that you yourself have not yet attempted to enter rings hollow, asking media producers to dismantle their copy protection so primary school teachers can loop the dance sequence from a cartoon is (ok not that last one)to kill the existing movie or music biz
biz as in business model.
I'm not alone in being skeptical that embracing the world of free is a red herring.
you seem very keen to see it all go down unless I'm reading you wrong but that's cos you're income is tied up in publishing royalties.evidence please that it's dying.
I haven't seen you come though with a touring act to play a shitty gig that nets less than $500 in a long while so forgive me if I'm somewhat hesitant to embrace your world view of how it all should go.
looking around me, (and I'm out there on a daily basis) income from music is down, way way down.the band rate at the local music hole has actually dropped from its $500 for a friday or saturday night (and it's been that rate for over 10 years without increasing) to $450 or less. Bands regularly come through and lose money on the costs of traveling and playing, more so than they ever did, and this is where under your scheme they're supposed to be picking up the cash they're not making on sales any more. That's my evidence, first hand. I've already mentioned it before but you've chosen to ignore it.we should break these posts up, no extra points for 3000 word essays toward the 100 pg total.
-
To my mind many of the arguments you've made here could diminish the value of copyright,
actually I'm going to need you to be more specific on that cos I think much of your recent stance diminishes respect and understanding of the value of copyright work. Are you simply referring to the issue of a quiet and smiling artist is more likely to get the sympathy dollar?
Russell's original stance on DRM was one of the reasons i signed on to waste hours arguing with reprobates over the finer points of non issues.
I wasn't seeing both sides of the issue represented, and obviously in the present climate it isn't cool to be the person that points out the down side of free media. Everyone's having too much fun gorging on unchecked free for alls, -
and you missed it.
sorry? where was the bit in your belly laugh comment where you grasped the predicament of the rock and a hard place the mpaa is in?
I totally missed the empathy and understanding of your fair and balanced appraisal. all I saw ways a one sided smirk and no real insight in to how you'd deal with it better from their side.could diminish the value of copyright
cos the argument over copyright isn't about fairness or what's right, its about pr, and apparently we can't have an open and honest discussion on the implications of eroded copyright here without hitting that same pr bollocks.
One one hand you praise people like myself for our independent spirit and such
I've been very careful to praise your indie work, that's the stuff I hold you in high regard for.
I'm not a fan of the whole creating hits and chart statistics carry on that you love. that's business over art and its not what I'm arguing for. You enjoy it, I dislike it, we can agree to differ on that.and on the other you argue fervently for the corporate suffocation of the arts we all fought so ardently against.
and I've clearly stated i'm not a fan of corporate media. Im not arguing for them, I see that what effects then effects everyone down the line to the small players, and they're the one's I'm interested in. I think its narrow minded to kill the existing movie or music biz cos of the top players, because that's only a portion of the picture. I've been trying to make that distinction.
-
Try teaching lecturers to do that!
is the other problem.
I spent 7 years working for the local uni assisting lecturers in their av needs. many of them were insanely unco when it came to simple technical things, which is I guess what the av dept was there to help them sort.The worst stuff to work with was computer gear. it was always failing.
a lecture hall full of 500 plus students and the lecturer not able to operate their own gear and you're there trying to fix it for them,.... some of the most treasured moments of my life.
glad I'm not doing it any more. -
Apparently you don't have any sense of the perspective of teachers,
that's what you're here for Jake.
so are you saying that in order for dvd's as supplied to be adequate for the task of teaching motion picture producers need to disable their copy protection for education purposes, or are you saying they need to do better on the scene selection bit? What's your solution to the problem?
-
because the law says you can or can't do that, and that should be reflected in code, supposedly.
which is nice in theory but I would guess that the reason the dvd I tried to copy which wouldn't even mount in any computer but played perfectly in a dvd player was a lucky fluke for the industry and they don't actually have the leeway to be flexible on it.
and still they do offer copies at affordable prices with scene selection, obligation fulfilled? -
The only voices I've found supporting the MPPA on this anywhere seem to be on this thread.
which indicates what?
that most of the voices speaking are incapable of comprehending the position of copyright holders. that must make the skilled debaters out there feel very proud indeed.I think the MPAA has quietly dropped the copy by camera concept and hopes that everyone else forgets too.
as well they should.
They should say we provide scene selection and affordable dvds. knock yourselves out.