Napster

Adam Levenstein cleon42 at SPAMyahoo.com
Thu Feb 15 11:00:31 MST 2001



--- Maryann Bowers <maryannbowers at email.msn.com>
wrote:
> On a less abstract and ethical note, naturally
> Napster hurts the bottom line
> profits of a label, but in the meantime stealing
> property of any kind is
> going to have immediate effects on those who
> manufacture and distribute it
> long before it pinches the people at the top of the
> industry.

Of course, the assumption is that the artists *are*
getting something. They're not. Exactly what are the
artists going to lose?

> Does it
> really help the artists if their record companies
> are so damaged by Napster
> that they cut their roster to include only the
> biggest money-makers;

Kindly name a single record company that has either
done this or is even seriously considering doing so.

> does it
> help the cultural consciousness overall to have a
> few, commercially
> successful, undiverse kinds of music to choose from;

Actually - this is where Napster is beneficial. It
doesn't discriminate. You can find everything from
Metallica to obscure local bands who are trying to get
their name out. I was able to find Dock Boggs
(old-time banjo player) recordings on Napster. Dock
Boggs! If you can find a single National Record Mart,
Wherehouse Music, or Sam Goody that carries his
recordings, I'll be stunned.

It's the RECORD COMPANIES THEMSELVES that give us such
few choices. Napster and mp3.com are helping, not
hurting.

> and does it help anyone
> engaged in the business of promoting music (most of
> whom make a pretty
> average salary) to have to give up their jobs and go
> into other industries?

Aw, those poor babies. Generally they drive nicer cars
than the artists who they promote. I suppose next I
should feel sorry for the manager who loses his job
during a strike.

> On the subject of promotional costs being loaned out
> with interest, this is
> no different from any other loan.

Really? Well, that makes it ok then. Never mind
indentured servitude. Oh, wait, this is all "in good
faith." I forgot.

> Flawed?  Deeply.  But Napster is not the answer.

For once artists have the ability to get their music
directly to listners without having to give those
sleezebags in Nashville, Vegas, and LA all the money
for it. And Napster is considered the problem. Let me
get my fiddle, if the label lets me play it, that is.

"Flawed?" Bullshit. "Corrupt" is the word you're
looking for.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/





More information about the Marxism mailing list