Comments on: Megan Flirts With Content, Copyright and Culture http://worldmegan.net/2009/10/content-copyright-culture/ (worldmegan) Wed, 17 Mar 2010 06:08:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Jeremy Meyers http://worldmegan.net/2009/10/content-copyright-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-2327 Jeremy Meyers Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:23:40 +0000 http://worldmegan.net/?p=3018#comment-2327 Oh I absolutely believe that content creators and especially artists should be paid for their work, but having spent a decade in the music industry, the pitiful amount that actually ends up in artists pockets at the end of the day from a 'legal' digital music sale is miniscule enough as to just be insulting, if it ever gets to them at all.<br><br>More artists should have paypal donation boxes on their websites. Oh I absolutely believe that content creators and especially artists should be paid for their work, but having spent a decade in the music industry, the pitiful amount that actually ends up in artists pockets at the end of the day from a 'legal' digital music sale is miniscule enough as to just be insulting, if it ever gets to them at all.

More artists should have paypal donation boxes on their websites.

]]> By: BobPoole http://worldmegan.net/2009/10/content-copyright-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-2326 BobPoole Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:25:18 +0000 http://worldmegan.net/?p=3018#comment-2326 Excellent post and argument for information freedom. You'll get no argument from me. But, I was struggling with the question of what happens to the creative who just want to do their one thing. They don't want to evolve. Don't they have a right to make a living selling their work? <br><br>I've thought about this for a long time and if I ask an artist my age that question I will often get a very different answer than you or Jeremy would give me. I believe these artists do have a right to make a living selling their work. And, they believe they need a law to keep others from "stealing" their livelihood.<br><br> But, I also believe that by not evolving they will be bypassed by everyone else and the "work" they do will be irrelevant very quickly. They need to change their model. They do need to evolve. The future is built on the past. Excellent post and argument for information freedom. You'll get no argument from me. But, I was struggling with the question of what happens to the creative who just want to do their one thing. They don't want to evolve. Don't they have a right to make a living selling their work?

I've thought about this for a long time and if I ask an artist my age that question I will often get a very different answer than you or Jeremy would give me. I believe these artists do have a right to make a living selling their work. And, they believe they need a law to keep others from “stealing” their livelihood.

But, I also believe that by not evolving they will be bypassed by everyone else and the “work” they do will be irrelevant very quickly. They need to change their model. They do need to evolve. The future is built on the past.

]]> By: Jeremy Meyers http://worldmegan.net/2009/10/content-copyright-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-2322 Jeremy Meyers Sun, 04 Oct 2009 02:52:04 +0000 http://worldmegan.net/?p=3018#comment-2322 What you're talking about is control. And control is always an illusion. Copyright law didn't stop Dangermouse from making The Grey Album, which brought him to the attention of Cee-Lo, which lead to Gnarls Barkley. We all break the copyright illusion all day. It's a myth, and clinging to the myth that any one of us has any control over what happens in life, and attaching ourselves to that, is the cause of great suffering. It's true on a personal level, and on a legal level.<br><br>Information wants to be free, people will talk and share whether the law wants us to or not.<br><br>Ideas don't belong to us, they belong to the world, and sometimes they flow through our minds and bodies.<br><br>The spirit of global sharing that we're on a path to achieve through the internet and love will bring this realization, i hope.<br><br>Or, in shorter words, "The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it,"<br><br><3 What you're talking about is control. And control is always an illusion. Copyright law didn't stop Dangermouse from making The Grey Album, which brought him to the attention of Cee-Lo, which lead to Gnarls Barkley. We all break the copyright illusion all day. It's a myth, and clinging to the myth that any one of us has any control over what happens in life, and attaching ourselves to that, is the cause of great suffering. It's true on a personal level, and on a legal level.

Information wants to be free, people will talk and share whether the law wants us to or not.

Ideas don't belong to us, they belong to the world, and sometimes they flow through our minds and bodies.

The spirit of global sharing that we're on a path to achieve through the internet and love will bring this realization, i hope.

Or, in shorter words, “The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it,”

<3

]]>