30 Jun
2010
30 Jun
'10
5:21 p.m.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 10:14:27 Paul Davis wrote:
as i see it, the same argument applies to artists and
other people who
spend time creating expressions of ideas. the big question is whether
or not society agrees that it is desirable for such work to be able to
be the basis of a way of making living. if a musician/composer is
going to make a living from their work, its important for them to
retain control over people's ability to copy what they create.
Or to be paid up front, in full before releasing the first copy... Or to?
if we
want a society in which people can do this sort of thing for a living,
giving them this control (on reasonable terms)
This is currently the big rub. The terms today are not reasonable. Far from
it. But supposedly these totally over the top terms are still not good enough
to ensure that the artists can survive.
What to do? Personally, I rather try and live with no copyright than what we
have now.
Do you have or know of a set of proposed reasonable terms that will allow
artists to survive?
all the best,
drew