udo said:

Tremolina said:

Suppose you would be a songwriter for a living and you would have been responsible for writing a couple of hit songs that are being played, copied and sold all over the world.

Would that matter?

Sure.

To a certain extent.

I do not need protection of my supposed copyright for absurd lengths of time.

I will save for my pension from my income. My children can take care of themselves.

OK. How long would be long enough?

Tremolina said:

udo said:

Sure.

To a certain extent.

I do not need protection of my supposed copyright for absurd lengths of time.

I will save for my pension from my income. My children can take care of themselves.

OK. How long would be long enough?

That depends on the effort going into the work and/or the hit-worthiness.

(how well it should score...)

Of course the latter is hard to quantify in absolute ways.

Also: not every song is a hit or can be a hit.

Still the song can be good but remain a hidden gem.

so it sells 50K copies worldwide. How much should that pay to the artist?

Depends on the deal.

So when an average artist can sell 50K in a year and release an album every year with an average deal with an average label an average income for that year from each album would be fine.

There's too many variables to put it in a simple equasion.

udo said:

Tremolina said:

OK. How long would be long enough?

That depends on the effort going into the work and/or the hit-worthiness.

(how well it should score...)

Of course the latter is hard to quantify in absolute ways.

Also: not every song is a hit or can be a hit.

Still the song can be good but remain a hidden gem.

so it sells 50K copies worldwide. How much should that pay to the artist?

Depends on the deal.

So when an average artist can sell 50K in a year and release an album every year with an average deal with an average label an average income for that year from each album would be fine.

There's too many variables to put it in a simple equasion.

Isn't that (effort and/or hit-worthiness) a bit complicated to assess? Better yet, totally subjective?

If I understand you correctly, you are saying one song should be protected for a longer time than another.

Tremolina said:

If I understand you correctly, you are saying one song should be protected for a longer time than another.

I am trying to find out how much am average artiost can make from a song or a simpel album (within a year or a few years) so I can maybe deduce what long the protection should be.

RodeoSchro said:

CharlieRise said:

I agree. Artists should be able to get entire sites pulled down at their whim with the burden of proof on the site owner. While we're at it, let's let them destroy emerging businesses in the name of control and profit...

Ridiculous.

The issue is, should the person who created something be paid for it?

More to the point - is it right for someone else to take that creation, which is for sale, without paying for it?

I don't care what times you are referring to - taking something without paying for it is theft.

That's not the issue. The main thing Paul Williams was talking about was streaming services, Pandora and the like, not giving them a big enough piece of the pie. Streaming services that are barely keeping their head above water and services that the industry would love to see die since they can't control them the way they could with the radio or MTV. If the Paul Williams' of the world had their way, any innovative service that threatens the status quo would be snuffed out in it's infancy.

.

Second, it's not theft. Theft is depriving somebody of an object. If I walk into Wal-Mart and grab a CD off the shelf, not only did I get something without paying the artist, but Wal-Mart is out that physical item I took.

.

If I download something, the artist didn't lose anything other than hypothetical profit. I say hypothetical because I could most likely check that item out from the library or buy a used copy, two ways that are legal and still result in the artist recieving no money.

.

You wouldn't say I was stealing from Prince if I paid $15+ for The Gold Experience from a person on eBay but you would say I'm stealing from Prince if I downloaded a copy...even though the end result is the same (Prince gets no money)

.

Morality isn't black and white. I'll admit I've pirated a tons of stuff. But I've also bought everything from 3rdeyegirl.com legit. And I buy as much stuff to support the working artists I love that my wallet can afford.

.

I think most "pirates" would say the same thing.

[Edited 6/21/13 9:04am]

udo said:

Tremolina said:

If I understand you correctly, you are saying one song should be protected for a longer time than another.

I am trying to find out how much am average artiost can make from a song or a simpel album (within a year or a few years) so I can maybe deduce what long the protection should be.

I think that is an impossible task.
What is "average"? And should the period of protection thus differ between music and books for example?

udo said: