Fred Brum: This is absolutely free for the final consumer and I gain ZERO from it, but it was MY choice


The amount of elaborate argumentation to justify stealing digital property is nothing short of amazing - a digital copy, as the name implies, is indeed a replica, and I still have the original.

You know, the same original I paid from my money to produce, which has CD's printed via my money, and copyright (I believe the name is self-explanatory) I paid for myself, not to mention the very long hours of work I did myself. There are no corporate monsters, no shady dealings, no companies doing my marketing, it's all my work and money, and it will get ripped and distributed illegally like all others (albeit with a lot less downloads than, say, Periphery or Animals as Leaders). Everytime that occurs, I'll get 0 back, so I go from the "potential sale" to the "guaranteed no sale" with a click.

Now that many musicians are self-produced, the whole "taking from the evil corporate machine" thing needs to be taken with a grain of salt, more than ever before....

You are mixing two very different issues here, and that leads to a flawed logic, in my opinion. Simply put "making a living off of music" and "expecting to get paid when people actually get the work you put for sale" aren't in the same league to begin with.

The whole "making a living off music" is something that is as diverse as it gets. Being reasonable, your original work will get you some income if people fancy it enough, but many of us end up doing all sorts of session work and hired gun stints to make sure we can get along without major issues. Speaking of my own case, I do not expect Atonement to net me vast sums of money in any way shape or form, nor such a torrent of gigs that I can afford to stop doing session work and the like and become a new Steve Vai of sorts - expecting that is, at least in my view, unrealistic and supremely arrogant, as you assume many, many thousands will find you awesome and flock to buy your stuff. I do expect people to stream the tracks to give them a listen and, should they like them and want to keep them, pay me (and it is ME they are paying, as I am solely responsible for the entire process) to do so. If not, stream away - it's free and I'm more than happy to see people go to one of my pages to enjoy my songs.

This brings me to point 2 instantly. I am already taking a risk in making the album at my own expense to begin with, and until further notice, I got 0% of my hard earned cash back, with more money to go when I place the CD order and pay Mattayus for the final masters. I am also giving one of my tracks away in exchange for a measly FB wall post, and I never remove tracks from streaming unless I am replacing them with a version with better quality. This is absolutely free for the final consumer and I gain ZERO from it, but it was MY choice. I own the material, I make it free in whatever form I deem appropriate. That also makes it my choice, and one that must be respected legally and ethically, to ask for money should you like my songs enough to want a full resolution download. By doing this, I'm expecting decency, not a half-arsed excuse regarding the evils of modern corporations my solo work isn't even related to, sorry.

I also don't expect anything from music, I simple make it because it's in my nature to do so - this doesn't exclude that I ask for people to help me out as I don't eat air, nor does my family, and other than the expenses I have doing the best I can to give you guys a pleasurable listening experience, the time I spend taking care of all this stuff is time I'm not getting paid for in any way except for the less than 2 pints worth money the downloadable version will cost....

Streaming tracks is free. Such players and their playlists are also easy to embed, share over social networks, and quite a few of them work perfectly on mobile phones. Don't give me the whole "they'd be nowhere if not due to piracy" - they are where they are due to hard work, and due to having the money and factual numbers to support their touring while allowing them to make a profit. When you're touring to promote a new album, the objective is, surprisingly enough, to promote the album.

I'm sorry, but that particular argument is among those that really strike me as mind boggling and farfetched. If you sell very few copies, you get dropped. If everyone's ranting and raving but no one pays enough for you to have a next album, you stop due to lack of funds. This is as simple as it gets.

feedback

Comments