| >In my eyes, your take on things is very far from the live-and-let-live stance that you appear to want to adopt. That's because I want to kill. I want to throw away copyright, I want those musicians that sign up to work with greedy suits--not to cast aspersion on your (former?) line of work which seems to be good-faith and productive--to have to find other ways to express themselves, I want the systems that were _once_ our best effort at promoting artistic expression to die. I want these things dead because after they're dead the absurd but somehow sometimes true accusations of "selling out" won't have any weight. I _actually don't care_ that people will lose jobs because copyright is dead. >I think one bad side-effect of the internet is that it has removed people so far from the means of production that they are incapable of appreciating the work that goes into what appears in front of them. I think this is the most insightful sentence of your post. It attacks the central barrier to removing copyright with a few swift words. Thus I think it important to describe the manner in which I find that it misses the mark. The Internet is bringing people into contact with the arts of gardening, cooking, woodworking, electronics as never before. Absurdly the disconnect between production of food and appreciation for food has grown _so large_ that food production is looked at as an art--that is, just another mode of human expression! And I couldn't be happier about that. Appreciation of art is the act of appreciating the work that goes into it. --- The problem, of course, is that our economic woes _far_ overshadow our cultural ones. You speak from the side of "There is no free lunch," and we may well be on a course where that is alarmingly and devastatingly true. If the Euro collapses, if America can't afford to keep its carrier fleet's Pax Americana running, it may turn out that the debate over copyright was not important at all. |
Edit: Huh. Well, someone downvoted that post ridiculously fast I guess.