Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jan 2000 21:44:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2234 times
|
| |
|
|
<FnxK4w.Gt1@lugnet.com> <3874FDA7.2043@mindspring.com> <FnxMM8.6Av@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dave Schuler wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> > People who write worthwhile material will be supported irrespective of
> > ability to copy protect their work. In fact, ultimately, the consumers
> > will protect the works (why should I let you read my copy of XYZ, when
> > you can download it yourself, and chose to pay what you think it is
> > worth).
>
> Where and when is this magical land? And how does one get there, because
> clearly this philosophy has little to do with the state of the market today,
> or of any time in the past four centuries, since the concept of authorship
> came to the fore. Why are there copyright laws if "authors will be supported
> irrespective of ability to copy protect their work"? Or will copyright laws
> cease to exist in the face of this enchanted "protect-the-artist" sentiment?
> If I'm making a living on writing, I certainly don't want to rely on the
> kindness of strangers to ensure that my electronic book isn't sent all over
> the Internet for free.
My assertion is that the mass market stores are going to be pushing such
drek, that those looking for real works of art will search for, and find
it on the internet. They will be willing to pay the authors to keep the
material coming. Again, I refer you to Lugnet. We don't have to pay a
red cent to use Lugnet, yet how many people have joined Lugnet just
because they want to support Todd's efforts?
> > The logistics of internet distribution are trivial compared to the effort
> > required to create the work in the first place. Marketting is also trivial
> (Todd - how much have you spent on marketting Lugnet?).
>
> And how many people have read the Lugnet Novel? The logistics of marketing
> an essentially free website among those who were already aware of it (namely,
> AFOL's) is trivial compared to the effort of marketing a book or painting. No
> disrespect to Todd, but the two issues are hardly the same, especially
> considering that Todd's front page asserts its non-profit status.
Again, the effort of marketting is minor. I found Lugnet within days of
coming out of the closet as an AFOL. I don't recall seeing a single paid
add by Todd.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) I understand your assertion, and I still assert that it has little reference to reality. Your analogy with Lugnet is likewise still flawed. (...) Okay, then, how much money has Todd made on Lugnet? Enough to support himself with no other (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) Aw, Larry, you had me right along with you up till this bit. Well, I'm still mostly with you, but a considerable problem with art today--and this isn't just confined to our fine nation--is the predominant aesthetic trend as much as any dubious (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
