Fashion and Intellectual Property: "So Called Piracy, Actually Drives Industry"

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly

That's a good argument to remove copyright protection from practices like sampling. But most intellectualy property violation isn't about artists using existing designs in new and original ways; its about suburban kids who can well afford the music (check out their computer setups and ipods) downloading unauthorized copies. Come to think of it, the argument for enabling artists implies that there should have been an explosion of creativity in music and movies in the age of the download; gotta say, I haven't noticed that.

the creativity hasnt increased, the bar for what is creative has been lowered to compensate for the mass amount of amateurs making music and movies now.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara



Art isn't done for money. It's a drive, a compulsion. Artists make new art because they have to make art.

Maybe artists dont work for money, but producers, electricians, stage crews, the janitors who sweep the studio floors do work for money. I mean its lovely that bands can work in their garages and all, but i do thing that all those other folks add actual value.

Also artists can do different things. A singer can cut a record, or can, say, star in a broadway show. Which to do is likely in part an economic decision. Or, at a lower level, they can spend more time cutting records, or more time waiting tables. If they can actually make SOME money from the records, they can spend less time waiting tables. I guess in addition to ignoring the more proletarian occupations in the culture industry, youre also ignoring the thousands who need to make a living, but cant do so easily from their art. Some commie.