[Wolves] Episode 8 LugRadio and the elections

[Steve Parkes]

On 7 Jun 2004, at 11:17, fizzy wrote:

>  --- Steve Parkes <sparkes at westmids.biz> wrote:
>> That profit is directly related to a reduction in
>> the income of the artist.
>
> Any evidence for that? I know in the music business
> the growth of shared media has led to an increase in
> sales, as far as I know the software market isn't
> falling over due to a steady rate of copying (no, it
> isn't piracy, unless you attack Redmond in a large
> boat...)

If there are less sales of an item and the artist is on a very small 
comission on each item sold then the artist gets less money.  
Economics.

Note I am not just talking about music where there is much evidence 
that suggests p2p has increased the sales of many artists but a much 
wider thing.

Pirate copies of MS software probably help MS sell more software due to 
increased mind share but while they are not allowing some owners of 
pirated software to grab service pack 2 for xp they are now entering 
the next phase of the MS master plan and don't need the mindshare 
anymore and would rather have the hard cash ;-)  So piracy doesn't hurt 
MS (currently) either.

But artists not supported by massive multinational companies need to 
make a profit on ever sale (or potential sale)  they make.  It's ironic 
that self published software, music and authors are the most likely to 
embrass a different revenue stream if one was available and are the 
most punished under the current one.

Copying a book from a long dead author is one thing.  The company that 
owns the work didn't have to sweat to create it and in many cases 
didn't even exist when the work was created but they continue to bleed 
the consumers dry.  I doubt the artists in question would want a 
company to continue to milk their effort long after their family 
stopped seeing the benefit of it and would like to see works returned 
to the public domain.  I am against the extension of copyright terms as 
strongly as anyone but can't see how anyone can say take food from the 
mouth of the artist soon after a work was created.

I don't believe either of you want to take away the tiny dribble of 
money that ends up in the pocket of creatives but don't forget I would 
rather see the artist can greater control of revinue streams and 
embrase the new technology available for distribution.
>
>> sparkes
> fizz
> 	

sparkes