Why the US doesn't have cheap broadband

[CAlvarez]

There's a difference between negligence and gross negligence, and the laws are pretty clear on that. I have multiple LLCs but they don't protect me from gross negligence. A full corporation does.

But I also favor removing corporate privilege and returning to a basis of legal responsibility.

Quote: You're suggesting that we all enter into the same kinds of agreements (contractual agreements drawn up solely by the corporation) that recording artists enter into with record labels! That's an unregulated business, and look how well that's turned out.

You mean how they turned a nobody into a star, and then the star doesn't want to give payback for that? Or how that nobody wasn't forced at gunpoint to enter into said contract? Lie down with the devil, you might get burned.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez You mean how they turned a nobody into a star, and then the star doesn't want to give payback for that? Or how that nobody wasn't forced at gunpoint to enter into said contract? Lie down with the devil, you might get burned.

No, I mean how more than 90% of artists with recording contracts end up with nothing, yet the company makes boat loads of money. Google it for yourself. You'll see that recording companies treat the people that make the product as serfs. You only hear about the lucky stars, and even they aren't happy with their recording companies. Work in a company town (the recording industry is a company town) and you don't have choice about who you lie down with. No guns are necessary when it's sign or starve.

[CAlvarez]

So you're saying that the record companies are providing a valuable service to people who can't make it otherwise? How do you explain all the recent self-publishing success?

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez So you're saying that the record companies are providing a valuable service to people who can't make it otherwise? How do you explain all the recent self-publishing success?

Not at all. The record companies produce nothing of value. The artists produce, the record companies steal. They just do it with contracts.

I see the recent self-publishing boom as a temporary loss of control by the big record labels, as well as a good demonstration of how the record company's promotion is of no real value to the majority of artists.

The labels were unaware of the effects technology would have on their business models, and their response when they became aware was and is a huge blunder. Over time, they will adjust, and their oligopoly will continue. Not because they provide a valuable service, but because it they have the money and the power to crush the independents.

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam The labels were unaware of the effects technology would have on their business models... Over time, they will adjust, and their oligopoly will continue. Not because they provide a valuable service, but because it they have the money and the power to crush the independents.

Interesting thought.
However, I have a hard time seeing exactly how they might do that.

I would love to see Apple sign ever indy label and independent artist to their iTunes Store, giving them far greater control of the fruits of their creativity. Frankly I am disappointed that Apple has been incomprehensibly slow to do that. Sure, they’ve signed 30 indy labels recently -- but that’s minuscule.
.

[NovaScotian]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam Not at all. The record companies produce nothing of value. The artists produce, the record companies steal. They just do it with contracts.

I find it hard to square this statement with the fact that so many aspiring musicians and groups see a recording contract as an important goal in their career. Are you saying that they're all blind fools, or idiots? Why, if the record companies are "producing nothing of value", isn't all music indie?

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by ArcticStones Interesting thought. However, I have a hard time seeing exactly how they might do that.

Using the same method that guarantees that pure capitalism can't work without the right kind of regulation: consolidation. Over time, small, independent companies will have some success. The larger companies will copy and/or buyout some of them, and squeeze out the rest. The end result will be about the same number of large companies controlling the market as have been for decades. Prices will remain high, quality low, artists will continue to be ripped off, and labels will remain rich and powerful.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian I find it hard to square this statement with the fact that so many aspiring musicians and groups see a recording contract as an important goal in their career. Are you saying that they're all blind fools, or idiots?

I'd call it the foolishness of youth. They all learn though. Talk to any artist that's been in the business for more than a couple of years. To them, a recording contract is a necessary evil.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Why, if the record companies are "producing nothing of value", isn't all music indie?

For the same reasons that the independent butcher pretty much no longer exists, and that the independent book store is rapidly disappearing. The large record labels churn out large quantities of crap because they can. It costs them very little and they make it up in volume. Sure, quality suffers greatly, but quality affects the consumer, not the producer, and with the right marketing you can get people to buy overly processed crap for nearly the same price as quality goods.

[NovaScotian]

My, my, CWT, you sure do hate the society we live in, don't you? Is there one anywhere that you admire?

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian My, my, CWT, you sure do hate the society we live in, don't you? Is there one anywhere that you admire?

I hate waste, and I see our society throwing its prosperity away in order to make a relatively few people obscenely rich.

I admire Al Gore for saying that we need to develop a sustainable economic system — while he was still in office — even though he knew it would cost him politically.

I admire Steve Jobs for selling quality instead of cheap crap, and for recognizing that to have quality in computers you need quality software at least as much as quality hardware.

I admire Isaac Asimov for writing about many of today's problems fifty years ago: an empire crumbling at its foundations while its people carry on blissfully unaware, automation intended to make people's lives better but instead isolating and weakening people.

I admire anyone who doesn't try to push their religious beliefs on others, although that list of people is much smaller than it should be, especially in America.

[tlarkin]

What about the iPod? It is disposable, versus the cost of repair and how they feature limit to release a new product to bait everyone else into ditching their old iPod and buying a new one.

Its how our economy works and Apple can be blamed for it too, though some companies are worse, but Apple is not exempt from this.

[cwtnospam]

Yes, and I'm sure Steve burns fossil fuels too. So what? Isn't it possible to admire some one for one trait and not another? I didn't say that he was perfect, nor Al Gore. Not even Isaac Asimov.

[NovaScotian]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam I hate waste, and I see our society throwing its prosperity away in order to make a relatively few people obscenely rich.

Unfortunately, CWT, that cycle has been running throughout recorded history and I seriously doubt that it will be change now. Communism couldn't do it for all its high ideals. Athens really wasn't a democracy even if touted as the first one.

Quote: I admire Al Gore for saying that we need to develop a sustainable economic system — while he was still in office — even though he knew it would cost him politically.

Al Gore was by no means the first to propose such a thing -- he is only the most recent attempt.

Quote: I admire Steve Jobs for selling quality instead of cheap crap, and for recognizing that to have quality in computers you need quality software at least as much as quality hardware.

But by your standards (as I see them) he's "obscenely" rich.

Quote: I admire Isaac Asimov for writing about many of today's problems fifty years ago: an empire crumbling at its foundations while its people carry on blissfully unaware, automation intended to make people's lives better but instead isolating and weakening people.

Me too, and I read his stories beginning with "I, Robot" when I was in high school (a bit over 50 years ago). I read Heinlein then too. Asimov was an avid Humanist and was president of the AHA for many years along with others like Kurt Vonnegut, who was also a far-sighted SciFi author. At the other end of that spectrum was Ayn Rand who was staunch advocate of rational individualism and laissez-faire capitalism (The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, most notibly) -- good stories extolling the virtues of the very things to which you so often object.

Quote: I admire anyone who doesn't try to push their religious beliefs on others, although that list of people is much smaller than it should be, especially in America.

I couldn't agree more, and I'll go a step further and include cultural beliefs. I have no objection to your beliefs if they don't harm others and don't require that you insist that I join you. But I do object very strenuously to "big brother" government. A signature by a guy named Kee Hinkley sums it up: I'm not sure which upsets me more about this fearful age: that people are so completely unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate mine.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Unfortunately, CWT, that cycle has been running throughout recorded history and I seriously doubt that it will be change now.

True, and I hate it.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Al Gore was by no means the first to propose such a thing -- he is only the most recent attempt.

He wasn't the first, but he was Vice President and wanted to become President. That took courage.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian But by your standards (as I see them) he's "obscenely" rich.

Not one of his better traits. I console myself with the idea that he sells quality products to people who can afford to pay for them, and not cheap Wallmart crap to people who can't afford the low quality.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian ...good stories extolling the virtues of the very things to which you so often object.

I'm not against Capitalism. I just think that you can't have anything close to Capitalism without strong Anti-Trust laws/regulations. Without them you end up with an industrialized form of Feudalism. That works fine if you're the CEO. Not so much if you work for a living.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian I couldn't agree more, and I'll go a step further and include cultural beliefs. I have no objection to your beliefs if they don't harm others and don't require that you insist that I join you. But I do object very strenuously to "big brother" government. A signature by a guy named Kee Hinkley sums it up: I'm not sure which upsets me more about this fearful age: that people are so completely unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate mine.

Yes, and as corporations consolidate power, they begin to think that it's their right to dictate what we can and cannot do. I was watching an interview with Noam Chomsky earlier today on PBS. He was saying that while the American public has overwhelmingly wanted to change our health care system for some time, there hadn't been enough political will to do it. He explained that the political will from the medical industry was against it, so it hadn't been done. He said that now American industry was feeling the burden of healthcare costs, so it may be possible to make the desired changes as their political will counters the medical industry's. That's a sad commentary about our Democracy.

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Me too, and I read his stories beginning with "I, Robot" when I was in high school (a bit over 50 years ago). I read Heinlein then too...

Do you remember "Stranger in a Strange Land"?
Many telling moments in that book.

[NovaScotian]

Wasn't that the Heinlein novel that introduced the word "grok" to English vocabulary? The martian-reared kid who comes back to Earth and sees everything through completely naive eyes (i.e., like it logically and actually is)?

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Wasn't that the Heinlein novel that introduced the word "grok" to English vocabulary? The martian-reared kid who comes back to Earth and sees everything through completely naive eyes (i.e., like it logically and actually is)?

Yes, indeed, that’s the one!

[tlarkin]

hey nova I am a vonegut fan as well as douglas adams

[CAlvarez]

Quote: Not because they provide a valuable service, but because it they have the money and the power to crush the independents.

So providing startup money, recording facilities, marketing, and distribution have no value in your world. Interesting.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez So providing startup money, recording facilities, marketing, and distribution have no value in your world. Interesting.

Sigh. Value is determined by not only what you get, but what it costs as well.

Today, almost any band can record their own music for far less than what a label will cost them. Distribution is only a factor for established artists, who could afford to pay for better distribution and marketing if the labels didn't squeeze them with dishonest contracts. Marketing of new bands by labels is a joke.

The labels cost artists far more than they're worth, which means that they have no value. Many artists see this, and that's why they hate their record companies. It's also why so many are trying to go independent now that the internet makes it possible.