by quiet Wed 05 Sep 2001 10:50:06

In the newest Rolling Stone I was reading an article about how the CD companies are investing a lot into non-pirateable CD’s. They never specified exactly what they were researching, but I’m assuming it’s probably the watermarking they’re talking about, which will take about a week for someone to come up with some software that goes through it like a hot knife through butter. Anyway, one of the execs. at BMG made a statement that pisses me off more than any other quote I’ve heard from a record exec. “If people love music, they should stop doing this. Music CAN’T be free.” I think he missed the point somewhere.


Money makes lonely people feel good about themselves. Leave him to his greed. Poor pathetic soul.

Professional music really can't be free. It costs a shitload of money to buy equipment, another shitload to record (though computer savvy peoples could do a decent job for probably 10 grand), and a smaller shitload for the artists to make a living. Whether this money comes from live performances, record sales, or endowments for the arts (yeah, right), it's got to come from somewhere. I don't necessarily agree with the current market business model, but in an economic sense, music can't be free.

P.S.: I'll piss on your parade for ten dollars... and I'm not talking watersports.

Well art and music could be free to the consumers if we lived in a cooler enlightened society that valued the arts. The government could completely pay for said things pretty easily. I wonder what the total cost for all the live shows would be ... a billion dollars?? 1 billion dollars total maybe? So we have one or two less stealth bombers ... we could have free entertainment in exchange. Hell tax every american $4 per year and there's your billion dollars.

But in our economic model such things are just silly. Americans are too busy fighting for every little piece of shit they can get from the rich people to give a fuck about a possible country that actually cares about it's citizens more than their political value.

What? Music isn't free? No one told me.
The nanny singing a child to sleep.
Partygoers singing as they're pushed out of the nightclubs after closing.
Musicians playing on the streets and in cafes.
My pathetic rumblings on or with a guitar.

They're all free.

The insane commodification and professionalization of 'professionals' who do music for us costs. And it should cost. They're no different from doctors or programmers or professors or . They're institutionalized professionals who have dislocated us from what we are and how we represent ourselves... they play music for us, because we don't know how, we aren't good enough, we aren't qualified.

The question isn't about if pop music should be free... but why we need someone to be musical for us.


Well I was simply alluding to the civilizations of yesteryear where philosphers, scholars, artists, and musicians were all supported by the state and I was trying to state that it seemed like a good idea to support such causes as they promote public health and morale and stuff like that.

As far as should it be free? Well in my case your taxes would be paying for it ... but I honestly don't know. Half of me says it should ... half of me says its impossible. Services cost money under capitalism. Money is the tangible value of services and goods in this world ... so therefore everything costs money. That sucks ... but its the way of a market society. Everything has a price tag, a value. Nothing is truly free. So therefore pop music just seems like it could never be free. But the perception of it's cost could be dulled if not eradicated and as long as the people perceive it as free (just like we perceive public lands and other such non-free things that we pay for with taxes not with fees) ... then it feels free and that's all that matters.

Liesure activities have traditionally been associated with the ruling classes, those with the economic power, the owners of the means of production. I believe what both Sarah and I would like is, in some fashion, and anarchistic means of art. The paradigm that produced the business model we're ranting against is the same paradigm that oppresses most of the people on the planet... I think.


formatting is with Markdown syntax. Comments are not displayed until they are approved by a moderator. Moderators will not approve unless the comment contributes value to the discussion.

remember info?