How much would you pay?

[Tony Hardie-Bick]

dancingGoat wrote:
> Peter Korsten wrote:
>> The people who download it for free are the ones who would otherwise get 
>> it via P2P anyway, most probably. If I'd download it - which I won't - 
>> I'd probably pay ?5.
>>
>> - Peter
> 
> I think the concept of how we pay for music needs to change. I'm not quite sure 
> how it would or could work but some kind of licence to listen to music and bands 
> get paid based on how often they are played rather than how many copies exist of 
> the music.

That would be nice, but, personally, when someone listens to my music, I 
feel like thanking them, as it's the audience reaction that enables me 
to develop as a musician. I think being paid to play gigs is okay - it's 
a direct contract, and the pressure's on to deliver, but to pay for 
recordings when they can be copied so easily, seems to be contrary to 
the nature of the net (and the technical solutions to impose this, come 
very close to infringing various civil liberties - the "freedom to 
compute" is somewhat abstract, but very important). Having said that, I 
believe that any artist that is signed to a conventional contract, and 
makes royalties etc, should have their rights (and business model) 
respected. If there were more of a mix of business models, then 
evolution could occur.

Choosing how much to pay is fun, but a gimmick. The reason the GPL is so 
common and so effective at providing an alternate model for software 
development, is that it is underpinned by a philosophy (whether or not 
one agrees with it), rather than a gimmick or a "nice gesture". Stallman 
has said he doesn't think Freedom for works of art is ethically 
important, in the way that software Freedom is - and I agree. Software 
is a means of production, greatly liberating to those who wish to work 
for a living. Free art is a different thing altogether, but the 
old-style music biz has *lots* of dynamics that run counter to various 
creative ideals. By that, I don't mean that manufactured pop is "wrong" 
- that's BS - entertainment is an art form, and the cheaper and more 
plastic and throwaway it is, the better, in some respects. The problems 
that occur are more to do with artist development and diversity; a more 
subtle enrichment of culture over time. For this, I believe that music 
Freedom (in similar terms to GPL), may have some particular advantages. 
However, I must confess, there's a lot to think about, and I haven't 
really thought about enough of it yet.

Tony (HB)