|
There are several sides when it comes to
P2P.
Just recently, I heard on the radio how figures
show that the biggest downloaders are also the
biggest buyers of music. I heard this from the
mouth of a well known saxophone player called
Candy Dulfer, she played with Prince and a whole
heap of artists and she's quite famous in the
country where I live.
I also know, that my music is shared over these
networks. Officially, this is just as
"illegal" as putting music of let's say
Madonna in your share map. I never wrote anywhere
that it's okay to do so, and I have the copyright
of my music.
But now, watch this: years ago I wrote to the
Dutch "copyright police organization"
and asked them if it was beneficial to me to
become a member of their organization. For they
claimed to cash royalties for artists. They told
me, no don't join us, because we only cash and we
don't give that cash to the artists.
So, people who have my music on their P2P share maps
might find the copyright police on their doorstep
who will come with all kinds of arguments about
piracy and you will have to pay them for sharing
my music. But I don't get the cash.
Now, apart from the fact that I would never
send the police and their brutality to anyone who
loves my music enough to want to share it with
others, even if I would it wouldn't benefit me at
all.
Let me share another thing which happened to
me. As anyone can read in articles like "The
Ballad of MP3.com", I as an online artist was
getting to the position where I could actually
love completely of my music by putting it on
MP3.com, people download it for free and I get
royalties still.
The best way to do music, I still think.
But it was the established music industry in
the form of VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, who looted MP3.com
empty and deprived me of 100% of my income. Even
more, because they subsequently wanted me to pay
them money for being on MP3.com.
It was this very same music industry that
started to weep and wail back in the 1990's about
loss of income.
When I write this, I feel the anger again.
These hypocrites in their big villa's scream blood
and fire because they can't sniff as much cokane
as they used to do and oh dear, they might even
lose one of their rolls Royce's...
And who has to pay?
I as an independent artist.
And you too.
I read stories about little girls who share a
Madonna MP3 and get a visit by ones practicing
police brutality to scare the little girls. I
would never want my music to be
"defended" like that. Fire burn that.
Everyone should stop buying these artist's works
and only play it when it is a so-called illegal
MP3.
That little girl I speak about, shared that
music because she loves that music. She doesn't
have the money to get all the CD's, so if she did
not have P2P she would simply be deprived of music
because she has no money.
Now, forward this to Reggae Music. Should it be
so, that when people really do not have money,
that they should be deprived of listening to
Reggae Music which is -a lot of times- about
sufferation and so on?
So, that's one side. Clear enough, I would say.
But now, there is another side too.
Because not having money is just one reason why
people use P2P. Not wanting to spend it is another
reason.
And this is where another experience comes
in.
|
