THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: Tova on 10 Feb 2016, 23:13
-
Here is a story you're most likely at least passingly familiar with.
http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/will-streaming-music-kill-songwriting
I would really like to see QC incorporate this into the story. I can't imagine how Sven would be entirely unaffected.
-
That article, though interesting is a bit disingenuous on nearly every point as far as I can tell. The sharks share of revenues go to the studios and their Hollywood accounting takes care of the rest. Before copyright, and even earlier the concentration of power into a few individuals at the beginning of the industrial revolution, an artist by profession lived by the sale of their wares to an appreciative audience or through patronage by a sponsor be it person or institution.
The internet of things is bringing all that back around full circle thanks to the breaking down of walls between artist and audience, and the bypassing of the gates and gate keepers who are trying every trick in the book and a few new ones to maintain their stranglehold on cultural content.
The problem is that the old model and its intricacies has been almost completely lost and forgotten and now has to be built from the ground up into a working system once again.
Copyright was created to help artists have exclusive control over their creations for a fixed period so that they may reap the benefits of their work and be encouraged to produce more. This life+60 +90 +infinity is a bastardization of the concept and just allows the holders of the copyrights to keep ripping everyone else off for zero contribution on their part.
-
Please; internet of things is a misnomer. IoT stands for Internet of Targets.
Agreed that artists are returning to the pattern of minstrels, where they make their money on live shows and private sales instead of allowing all their stuff to be "owned" by aggregators.
-
The article is about song writers, not performers...
-
This would be a natural for Jeph to explore.
-
The article is about song writers, not performers...
There is not that much difference really. Think of artists who create with image, no matter the medium. Their audience is the public, their fan base specifically if they can develop one. Composers of symphonies didn't get sponsored because they could perform what they wrote but because of what they wrote. The great ones did really well and had generous patrons. The popular at the time creators made a decent living if they were able or eventually changed their line of work or starved. A song writer creates for his audience who are the performers, a different form of art for sure. The patronage model is still the same though.
This would be a natural for Jeph to explore.
It would but I'm not sure he would want to delve into it since it might be too close to home. Then again he has surprised us before and it would be an interesting story.
-
I'm aware of the similarity between composer and performer, thanks.
The critical difference with regards to this topic is that composers depend on royalties. If their work is being performed but the composer is not receiving due and fair compensation, they they are kind of stuffed.
-
There is not that much difference really. Think of artists who create with image, no matter the medium. Their audience is the public, their fan base specifically if they can develop one. Composers of symphonies didn't get sponsored because they could perform what they wrote but because of what they wrote. The great ones did really well and had generous patrons. The popular at the time creators made a decent living if they were able or eventually changed their line of work or starved. A song writer creates for his audience who are the performers, a different form of art for sure. The patronage model is still the same though.
The difference is that performers get paid (in the new model) because that's the way to hear them live, but the composer doesn't perform live shows, so she risks getting paid only if the performers feel like paying (and are able to). The same way the people who want to criminalize downloadable music are concerned about people listening to recorded music without paying the album manufacturers, some similar agency would have to be concerned about performers using composers work without paying the composers.
Ultimately I expect that most artists would just compose their own stuff, wrapping up the composer/performer thing in one package so the composer gets paid from the live shows or private album sales too. People who want to compose but not perform may have a limited future.
-
People who want to compose but not perform may have a limited future.
It's still a healthy model in classical music.