Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 02-27-2005, 05:23 PM

sob:

the slavery analogy was just an analogy--if you actually read the post carefully, its point is pretty both really limited and quite clear.

as for your claim that i and others who are at least offended by the riaa and its practices of late "feel entitled to other peoples' money"--it was not worth the time it took to read through.... it means nothing.

as a musician myself, i feel like i can speak about this from a viewpoint not simply defined by consumer practices and riaa justifications for trying to limit them. for example, i oppose much existing copyright law both in principle and because as it is currently set up, people who work in the kind of music i do get and can get no protection from it for their own work because 19th century notation does is not sufficient to describe the sound we work with.
so we could not retain composer rights in any real way if something were to require litigation--such was the outcome of the james newton vs. the beastie boys case of a couple years ago. so in addition to other problems i have with the riaa, i see them as trying to prolong the life of a system that from its inception is based on antiquated notions of what music is, one that operates to the exclusion of many many players who work in more experimental fields. so as a musician, i see nothing good or politically justifiable in the riaa's actions.

but i am sure that such ways of seeing do not and would not cross your mind--not is you manage to twist the hell out of a relatively straight forward post that you even copy into your response. no matter, however. i simply understand your position as myopic.

02-27-2005, 05:23 PM	#41 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	sob: the slavery analogy was just an analogy--if you actually read the post carefully, its point is pretty both really limited and quite clear. as for your claim that i and others who are at least offended by the riaa and its practices of late "feel entitled to other peoples' money"--it was not worth the time it took to read through.... it means nothing. as a musician myself, i feel like i can speak about this from a viewpoint not simply defined by consumer practices and riaa justifications for trying to limit them. for example, i oppose much existing copyright law both in principle and because as it is currently set up, people who work in the kind of music i do get and can get no protection from it for their own work because 19th century notation does is not sufficient to describe the sound we work with. so we could not retain composer rights in any real way if something were to require litigation--such was the outcome of the james newton vs. the beastie boys case of a couple years ago. so in addition to other problems i have with the riaa, i see them as trying to prolong the life of a system that from its inception is based on antiquated notions of what music is, one that operates to the exclusion of many many players who work in more experimental fields. so as a musician, i see nothing good or politically justifiable in the riaa's actions. but i am sure that such ways of seeing do not and would not cross your mind--not is you manage to twist the hell out of a relatively straight forward post that you even copy into your response. no matter, however. i simply understand your position as myopic. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 02-27-2005 at 05:28 PM..