Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
allow myself to buy some good brushes instead of shoes for the kids without feeling guilty.
But the guilt is the best bit. ;-)
-
I have been Pilgerised damn it. that dancing quote. The whole quote would have been "If you're doing it right you're Dancing. If you're saying it right you're singing. If you think you're right you're just thinking."
It's mine I tell you. All mine.
Bwah ha ha ha. -
Steve Barnes - what on *earth* makes you think a writer is disasociated from the *material* side of things, mate?
Never said that, just noting that your comments have tended to be more of a materialistic bent than an Artistic one. No offence intended. I would love to hear about the joy you find in creating your works.
-
Kerry. At last, someone who is speaking from the creative side of the discussion (sorry Islander but you have tended to dwell on the materialist side) but;
. Copyright is one of your few certainties and protections.
That can only be true if copyright is available to all Artists and not just the elite few that can afford big law (and that includes the lobbyists that get the laws enacted) and that the public respects that right.
There's a moment when everything comes together, your technique, mood, research and history of pursuing that particular painting/subject, accident, mystery ... and the paint hits the canvas in a rush of perfection. There's nothing else close to that bliss.
Bliss indeed.
-
What's your favoured model for content creation to be funded- if not by the sale of copies?
I know you didn't ask me but. As has been mentioned before on this very thread. Added value, weather it be Audio quality, heck, some even say records sound better than CDs. Packaging even, stuff that costs to copy.
Copyright is a social contract (ignoring the fact that is enshrined in law and if you break it you pay) that will only work if that contract is, dare I say it? fair and honest. There are some who think that if you can get it for free then any cost is not "Fair" but there are also those that think a large multinational corporation suing your dead Grandmother for downloading an mp3 is not "Fair" either.
The answer my friend is blowing in the wind. Am I allowed to say that? -
Am I allowed to use the conditional pluterperfect?
As long as you rinse it afterwards.
;-) -
Thanx Islander. I would be cynical enough to assume that this practice has been abused by a few over the years.
I still have misgivings of people owning what could be considered as an "arrangement" of words or notes, images ect. when the real achievement is the conveyance of meaning. How you prove ownership of a meaning is beyond me. So I guess holding the copyright is as close to this proof you can have.
-
I thought the wireless was for Payola </cynicism>
I'm sure it goes for a lot of people but it would be as naive to say that it goes for all and has no negative impact on sales as the opposite argument by the recording labels that each download equals one lost sale is daft.
Don't quite understand what you mean there. Could you rephrase?
-
What is the impact on the creators? Are they losing billions of monetary units because of these billions of downloads?
Surely there is a point that without people downloading, the less people know of the existence of the work. So, a billion illegal downloads may produce a million legal downloads that would not exist otherwise, who can tell? There was a practice "back in the day" of record companies putting out "loss leaders" Cheap albums of mixed offerings from their catalogue, This, they hoped, would lead to increased sales of complete albums from artists. This model is now defunked by the availability of single track downloads ands, as such, is a good example of the state of the technology affecting the business model.
-
I think it could be a very useful one, for publishers, retailers and writers. We'll see.
You forgot readers.