R Parker wrote:
--- Patrick Shirkey <pshirkey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
BTW I respect Ron and his work but I am not prepared
to let that little
slight go by. tX is a highly undervalued piece of
software and anyone
who uses it deserves more encouragement to do
whatever the hell they
feel like with it. If a member of this list
personally doesn't like
artwork that is made public here then they are free
to criticize it but
telling someone to stop doing what they are doing
because they are not
original is BS.
I do not support, want to be associated with or
tolerate violating artist rights. I love and live for
music and musicians.
But you don't mind criticizing someone for being unoriginal because it
goes against your personal opinion of what is right for an artist to
call their own work!
You have conjured up a set of arguments to justify
your actions. Does violating copyrights do the artist
a favor by creating revenue and promotional
opportunity? No! I've seen this first hand and know
the outcome. Experience outweighs assumptions.
I too have experienced when others use my work for personal gain and I
have found the best way to deal with it is to accept it as an
inevitability and attempt to make sure my work is appropriately licensed
so I can get something back if it becomes financially viable. Otherwise
I will release my work under a copyleft license and be thankful when
anyone listens to it and enjoys what they hear.
Your a criminal for personal gain, artistic, social
and economic change. A Robin Hood for artists?
How about an antiestablishmentarialist? A Digital rights squatter with
enough peyote in my teacup to permanently blow your mind.
A
problem is that "digital musicians" who violate
copyrights as a rule return nothing.
That's your opinion. I happen to enjoy a lot of the music I have heard
that violates copyright. Often it is in the form of a mix CD that a
friend has given me.
As an artist, I will tell you that your assistance in
building my career through copyright violations is
unwanted.
Yeah right, so if I just happened to play your work in the next big
movie and you found out you weren't getting any dosh for it, but your
tracks started selling more copies at itunes then you would be really
unhappy and pissed off with the world. You would have to let everyone
know that the new found attention is totally unjustified and unwarranted
and that you are really embarrassed about having your tunes associated
with the movie.
However, I happen to know this is not the case but instead your music
was ripped off in an international business venture that went sour.
Unfortunately for you the outcome was that your samples were "Stolen"
and used in a professional DAW where you now have to endure the pain of
hearing the occasional track with your samples as a basis.
Aren't you just slightly pleased and gratified that anyone would want to
use your work as the basis for their own?
The question could also be asked as to why the company that ripped you
off feel it is acceptable to continue to use your samples without
further recompense?
Surely you had the presence of mind to publicly license your work before
you gave them a copy?
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://lau.linuxaudio.org - The Linux Audio Users guide
========================================
"Anything your mind can see you can manifest physically, then it will
become reality" - Macka B
