FinderDoug wrote:What's shameful is that you think debate should cease just because you're not around.Shameful, one sided debate on this while I was out of the cosmos.
Um. This is one of those occasions in which I am dead certain Frank was writing with his tongue in cheek and was misunderstood as being self-obsessed.
FinderDoug wrote:All of which illustrates that while a couple million people grasp the clear-as-day concept of buying your music and directly supporting the artist - which has worked for a century now - there are another 18,000+ who are thieving dirtbags.
This hits my core point, which is that the methodology for ensuring artistic compensation is an existing system of a proven track record. But now because things can be freely stolen, the folks who want free stuff want to legitimize their greed.
FinderDoug wrote:Frank may say, "Who cares? 18,000 copies is less than 1% of the total units sold in the first two weeks." Those 18,000 units also represent $234,000 value in stolen goods.
Exactly. Death by a thousand cuts.
FinderDoug wrote:And that's the silliest thing in all of this: that 18,000 people would risk having to pay a minimum fine of $750 for a $13 album. It's hard to have sympathy for that level of stupidity.
If only we could nail them. Of course, Frank is convinced we're trying to sentence them all to jail when we applaud the arrest of felons like Kim Dotcom, which is wholly off the mark.
We want them to pay for the work. That's it.
Compensate the artist. Period.