One of the blogs I follow has recently posted an article on the topic of the subject line.
Here's the post. It would be great to get your feedback, as you can see I have posted my own comments and have been slightly maligned for doing so. Am I wrong to think that art is inherently worth something if it's being consumed?
The original post is HERE
Totally with you on all your comments dude... What most people don't understand is that even though we do music because we love it, it doesn't mean we don't want to, or should make money from our time and effort.
I've been doing music properly for almost 6 years now and if Im honest I'm kind of at the breaking point now where I'm thinking "is it worth all the time i'm investing?" and "am I ever going to see a return on this?". There comes a point where you just can't justify it anymore, and thats what's going to happen to a lot of people if this whole piracy issue isn't address properly. To be honest, I'm surprised this still hasn't been addressed properly - file sharing must have bee going on for over 10 years now, and we're still none the wiser!
Anyway, my point is YES, artists should be paid for their work, unless they choose otherwise. It should definitely be in the hands of the artist/label to decide this, most definitely not the consumer... But unfortunately there's always going to be those that don't want to pay for music.
Sad times...
Posted by: Martin | September 20, 2009 at 07:26 PM