Everybody:

Brian thinks that I'm picking on Michael Laskow, and insinuates that I have some as-yet-unrevealed agenda (Brian's unspoken translation: 'axe-to-grind') against him, solely because of the vigor and flavor I apply to my arguments against 'all-you-can-eat' music pricing.

He also requests that I 'be constructive' and think-tank the music industry's silver bullet right here, right now.

Now, I didn't know that warning artists and songwriters against the danger of accepting infinitesimally less for their creations (Brian: 'it's the future, get used to it'), so that some other group of folks can have a profitable 'model', is NOT CONSTRUCTIVE.

I also don't understand the complaint that sound copyright-holders (major record companies) aren't giving away their store, which they aren't legally obliged to do (Property Rights 101, Americans?), so that some other group of folks can have a profitable 'model', and unless they do so at the rate demanded by the petitioners, the 'model' will die;

Except in the context: 'you guys have a way of making us rich, so fork over the goods, dammit!'.

Whatever happened to 'I'll do what I want with what I own, until such time as it suits me and best serves MY interest and pocketbook to do something else with it'?

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" doesn't include the inalienable God-given right to have all the tuneage I want regardless of whoever owns it!

But that's what 'all-you-can-eat' music services are ALL about. They cannot survive in the long run without music creators giving them what they want dirt-cheap, robber-baron-embarassingly less than market-value.

I have mentioned Mr. Laskow by name because his was the name attached to the interview, posted here by Brian. I have also mentioned Mr. Griffin, who Mr. Laskow refers to in his remarks.

I have consistently railed against ANY pricing that asks/promises/cajoles/arm-twists songwriters and artists into taking less that what is the current going rate in exchange for dubious rewards.

That's 'not constructive' around here.

I offer these excerpts from my writings elsewhere:

"COMPARABLE PRICE. A place where I eat regularly has a CD jukebox, 3 plays a buck, 7 for 2, foldin' money only. Folks routinely plug a couple of bucks in, several times a night, for the right to hear each song, of their choosing, precisely ONCE. In a public place where the only perceivable additional benefit to the purchaser is forcing everybody else to endure their dubious taste. Or not. Between 29 and 33 cents per. Some math: .33 X 3 = .99. Look familiar?

COMPARABLE PRICE. That place where I eat, a glass of Pepsi costs $1.25. And though the friendly ladies keep it full for me, when it's gone... a 20-ouncer out of the walk-in at the AM/PM is .99.

What does a single coffin nail go for these days? Folks may grouse, but I see 'em pony up $5.50 for a pack (that's 27 cents per death-dagger) out of the eatery's machine nearly every time I'm there. No repeatability. No resale value. Smoked an' gone. Five bucks fifty.

99 cents a song download is puffin' money. If an artist has a tune folks want, make it $2.79 for a 2-tune minimum (see "already accepted entertainment-purchase practice"). So that the artist can get some traction. Or 4 for $5 (a 'mini-album'?). So that 'cherry-picking' an album comes at a premium (ever tried 'cherry-picking' at a movie theater? "But I only want to see the love scene, the pie-in-the-groin gag and the decapitation!"). So that there's a big enough transaction (assuming that this was the extent of this customer's unique purchase) to make it practical.

99 cents is what the guy sitting next to me drinking a 2 dollar 75 cent 12-ounce longneck is paying some wireless outfit to hear that cheesy 15-second beep-blippet of "Livin' On A Prayer" when his Nokia rings."


AND:

"fear the 26% that won't ever pay, and the 20% that will join them if they feel 'aggrieved' that the music-creating portion of the populace won't slit their own throats to let them have all they want NOW or they'll just steal it, because that number will only grow as Gen Y lamentably procreates and inculcates their 'new economic model' world-view to the next gen of 'consumers' (NOT customers).

(ed. note: this next is directed at the argument that music has become a mere commodity, to be bulk- and single-priced lower.)

Anybody priced a Kia or a Hyundai or any other brand of auto produced by the commodity-production kings of the world? It ain't goin' down, I tell ya!

You price-droppers don't create music yourselves, do you? You're NOT music publishers trying to get songs cut and copies sold so YOU can keep a burrito in the belly and a quarter-tank in the Volaré of the songwriter (who just might be YOU!), are you? And you utopians and idealists seem to ignore that non-performing songwriters (who aren't with a major or indie and so will never get surveyable radio) LOSE THEIR ONLY SOURCE of income EVERY TIME someone takes a soundcopy without paying, and when 'consumers' (NOT customers) bitch and moan that evil sound-copyright-holders (MOST of whom are non-performing songwriters) charge too much and need to make it easier for them to get all they want from every OTHER artist.

Why is it that no-one complains that jukebox prices are too high while they're drinking a 3-dollar beer and eating a 8-dollar burger and driving to the next 10-dollar cover charge in a 300-dollar a month Korean car?

(ed. note: BUT, folks sitting at a computer complain that 99-cents is JUST TOO MUCH to buy a song they know they ALREADY LIKE and want to hear again and again! Go figure!)

Invited a plumber to your bathroom lately? He didn't work for an 'attaboy', a tuna sandwich, and a promise that you'd show up at his next sink-trap replacement, did he? And he wasn't charging less than his last visit."

(ed. note: This last paragraph was in response to the assertion that musicians should be satisfied with the joy of making music, gratefully take whatever they're offered for their work, and hope to get some turnout for their next gig.)


NOW, if all of the above adds up to character assassination and mean-spiritedness, best cash the reality check before you forget what it is.

DO I use derision in my arguments against this laughable, perhaps even destructive, pricing proposition and its proponents?

Yeah.

Mr. Laskow: "I didn't come up with the entire model. I've just amalgamated some other peoples ideas, and put a bow on it."

So I directed my diatribe at the name I saw here. End of story.

I said in a post above that if artists want to buy into that 'model', fine. Just don't come crying when it doesn't pay off like someones said it would.

Have a nice future!




------------------
EdX.iuma.com www.soundclick.com/40LOVE www.soundclick.com/EdX


[This message has been edited by ed323 (edited 03-08-2004).]

EdX.iuma.com http://www.soundclick.com/40LOVE http://www.soundclick.com/EdX