[atoav]

As a musician and filmmaker I see it like this: once my work is published I stop to be in total control of it. That means I cannot control (or sometimes even know) what paths my works will take, how it is being understood, who will do what with it etc.

Of course I like to be credited for my work — but some fan adding my work to a pirate page would not be a concern but rather a bit flattering. What would anger me would be someone claiming credit for themselves, some rich company taking the material without paying me, things of that sort.

[freetanga]

You can always publish it under a free license. Your choice, previous post can choose differently and charge.

Nothing wrong with expecting to get paid for your work. If as a consumer you don’t want to pay, stick to open source and freely licensed media.

[xhkkffbf]

You're being short-sighted if you think you're going to be able to sell material in the future if the recording company or studio goes out of business. The only reason they have money to support you is because the public supports them.

[atoav]

Huh? I do sell material right now without any recording company or studio in the loop. Why would that change if they go bust? If anything the demand for people like me would increase.

There are quite some hoops small self publishers have to jump through to get their music sold in a way it can actually interfere with the big corps in that space. These hoops are all there to make the market entrance harder, they are not there to protect artists.

[crtasm]

Before refreshing the thread I wondered if I was overlooking something in your earlier post, it feels so strange to me to assume a record company/studio are involved!