|
mixtape bust (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by SMC
And finally about profiting off of other people's work...
I had this incident once... I saw this guy who was awesome at washing cars, so i studied his method and started offering the same service, performed by me, to people who gladly payed me some money to wash their cars, they got really clean and that in a short amount of time because i was using this huge sponge and i did everything from the top towards the bottom, just like they guy i was talking about, all thanks to the fact i happened to see him in action and create a memory of it. One day he came to me and looked very upset, he said i wasn't allowed to wash that way and not make money on it on top of that. I thought it was nonsense, can he own the way i move my body or my buying and using the same sponge etc, whatever that may mean. He was angry and he told me he wanted to lock me in his basement or take an amount of money from me, i said wtf? Then he felt he was merciful i think, so he said i could continue doing my work as usual if i give him 25% of the money i make every day. I told him to off, so he shot me in the head with the gun he had in his pocket. |
I'm only addressing this part, since that's the issue.
That analogy isn't correct. You could maybe equate your example to being INSPIRED by another artist, then creating something SIMILAR, but still putting WORK into it. What this DJ Drama guy did though, was take someone else's work, sell it to others, and keep the money. Atleast he didn't take credit for the music, which some big names have done in the past.
Actually, I have an example of my own (ironically based on yours :P ):
A customer asks this guy to wash his car. He says alright, come back in an hour and it'll be sparkling clean. When the customer comes back though, the carwasher is on the potty, and you claim that he suddenly got ill and had to go home, and that you are his co-worker and YOU washed the car instead. So now you receive money for that poor man's work.
That'd be a more accurate analogy. |
|
|
| Blake_Jarrell |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Dingel
The appropriate analogy would be Armin selling ASOT CDs on ebay, since these were mixes by DJ Drama. |
thats what i meant, sorry i did not elaborate. |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
No. But patents are an entirely different case, since one of the goals of the patent system is to make information about inventions public: available for anyone who wants to view it. The limitation in the case of patents is on manufacturing, not on some imagined "ownership of information." |
They're not an entirely different case. They're a monopoly just like all other forms of IP granted by the state. I build a chair with a certain design, i get myself a patent from the lads at the state, then you know that you can't build a chair with the same design, because if you do i kill you, or not, wait, we're civilized, i send someone else to kill you (the guy who gets paid to do it, with the money stolen from you last month). Monopoly, elimination of competition through threat and use of force. All talk about it being some form of ligitimate thing that is good for the market and creates incentive is bull, yet that is how they try to justify it. It creates incentive to get just what the patent is, a monopoly. Monopoly and violent elimination of competition ar not phenomenas inherent to the free market or capitalism, they're just the government and their guns at work in a subtle and romanticized way. Free entry and competition is the thing we need, not patents. Who gets an incentive to do knowing that once they're done someone else will prevent them from using what they've come up with? I tell you who, the big guys with big companies with a lot of money that can afford taking such risks. The state handing out privileges to selected people, what does that have to do with capitalism and the free market? Nothing. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| Patents, unlike copyrights, were originally designed to expire after seven years. I think that is a reasonable way to provide incentives to inventors and entrepeneurs. What has messed things up is the perpetual patent renewal that we have these days, lobbied for, as you note, by the huge corporations. |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by SMC
They're not an entirely different case. They're a monopoly just like all other forms of IP granted by the state. I build a chair with a certain design, i get myself a patent from the lads at the state, then you know that you can't build a chair with the same design, because if you do i kill you, or not, wait, we're civilized, i send someone else to kill you (the guy who gets paid to do it, with the money stolen from you last month). Monopoly, elimination of competition through threat and use of force. All talk about it being some form of ligitimate thing that is good for the market and creates incentive is bull, yet that is how they try to justify it. It creates incentive to get just what the patent is, a monopoly. Monopoly and violent elimination of competition ar not phenomenas inherent to the free market or capitalism, they're just the government and their guns at work in a subtle and romanticized way. Free entry and competition is the thing we need, not patents. Who gets an incentive to do knowing that once they're done someone else will prevent them from using what they've come up with? I tell you who, the big guys with big companies with a lot of money that can afford taking such risks. The state handing out privileges to selected people, what does that have to do with capitalism and the free market? Nothing. |
We're talking about music, not practical ideas (I won't even get into patenting). Music is very personal, a song can't be re-invented over and over, because only one mind is capable of creating it. How is it right for someone who had nothing to do with the song in question to make money off of it, while the actual creator doesn't earn a dime? |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
Actually, I have an example of my own (ironically based on yours :P ):
A customer asks this guy to wash his car. He says alright, come back in an hour and it'll be sparkling clean. When the customer comes back though, the carwasher is on the potty, and you claim that he suddenly got ill and had to go home, and that you are his co-worker and YOU washed the car instead. So now you receive money for that poor man's work.
That'd be a more accurate analogy. |
That is more reminiscent to a case of fraud, which has nothing to do with what we were discussing here. |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by SMC
That is more reminiscent to a case of fraud, which has nothing to do with what we were discussing here. |
Still more accurate than your analogy. :p
I'm sure you have some deep, philosophical point, but I really just can't get past the fact that DJ Drama is making money off other people's work. I'm done here. |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
We're talking about music, not practical ideas (I won't even get into patenting). |
Me and mrjinglebells were talking about that.
| quote: |
Music is very personal, a song can't be re-invented over and over |
There is no need for re-invention, it can be duplicated an infite amount of times and shared by an infite amount of people at the same time without a conflict arising about it's use. So why is there a need for allocating property rights, what is the point? It's not like if i take your car, then you don't have it anymore, your car is a scarce resource. A conflict arises, you want your car back. Because of situations like this property rights are established. Then at some point in time some ass got it all wrong and thought it would be a good idea to try and apply these principles on non-scarce resources.
| quote: |
, because only one mind is capable of creating it. |
Wrong. It surely is unlikely that two unrelated complex songs turn out to be identical, but it's not impossible. And on a smaller scale it do happens, that's why there are cases of musicians demanding other musicians to be punished because they on purpose or not played or recorded the same sequence of notes as the other musician had done earlier, the horrible crime of plagiarism.
| quote: |
How is it right for someone who had nothing to do with the song in question to make money off of it, while the actual creator doesn't earn a dime? |
That someone probably didn't sign any contract prohibiting him from making money with the creators song. Distributors of music and musicans don't demand buyers of their music to agree to such terms, because they wouldn't sell a single cd if they did. Instead they print a few lines of bull on the sleeve refering to a law. And a law is not a contract, you are bound to the terms of a valid contract you enter, you are not bound to the commands of an organization that threatens you with use of force in spite of you not being of any consequence to them. |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
I'm sure you have some deep, philosophical point |
Yeah, opposing aggression is so deep, before i realized that aggression is wrong i thought it was ok to rape and murder people. I was not that deep at the time.
| quote: | | but I really just can't get past the fact that DJ Drama is making money off other people's work. I'm done here. |
Ok, you convinced me. As of now i am a follower of your school of thought. I can't get past the fact i think you're a moron, so i'm gonna put you in jail.
This is great. :eyes: |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
bs plain and simple.
I know I'm not necisarily winning friends saying it as far as people that make music and set out within the capitalist system to have a good life selling it.
THing is he was selling a physical product --- but I think music should be free, (as i think everything should be free)...
total b.s. jail for producing a music program?
people are so screwed in the head.
dirty world, dirty people.
I'm ashamed of the us court system for putting someone in prison for utilization of an arangement.
There was no real harm here, like nearly 100% of intellectual property crimes' It makes me sick to think that people are so low as to destroy peoples lives by inhibiting free reproduction of ideas.
If people can't get over control of the immaterial.. the material is an even larger struggle
but most people don't give a damn about world peace, equality and reason. definately not in america. defiantely not america or it's sense of justice. idiots. |
TANSTAAFL |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
PARETO. |
Is that something you yell at people? :nervous: :stongue: |
|
|
|
|
