Oh my

My last tongue-in-cheek rant has gotten a lot of feedback, from the clueless "You just want to have everything for free, think of us starving artists, you filth-eating Kazaa-lover"-crowd to the equally clueless "Go, man!"-people.

Is the art of irony really so lost these days? Or am I just having gland problems again?

Guys and gals - putting serious things in humorous clothes is a time-honored tradition. Everybody likes a good self-ironic pun at the gallows.

But some people have actually taken the time to point out some fallacies in that rant - fine. Fair enough. But... so fucking what? The key point still stands: we actually lied to the content industry, and that is a part of the reason why we are in this mess. We offered solutions to them that would allow the big media companies to get more money by offering less ("you can listen to this song only twice, and then you have to pay more!" "Right..."), and that just does not work. Think about it. The only place where such a draconian control is possible, is a a society which puts 1984 to shame in its all-encompassing iron control over everything you do. And we don't want that, now do we?

DRM does not work, unless we are going to accept someone watching over us every moment of our lives. And I think that's a bit too big a price to pay to the starving artists (who, by the way, would be a lot less starving if the producers and distributors screwed them less).

What we need are sensible solutions which take account the realities of digital life (including the fact that bits can be copied. Period.), and use them to give everyone a better experience. Especially to the creative people, who should be able to make a decent living out of entertaining the rest of us. Is that really so much to ask?


Note: Evidently this was not meant for the people who don't know what stands behind the abbreviation DRM... Once I dug it up from the net, the whole thing started to make sense...

--Spinsteri, 23-Sep-2004

Love 2 Hate for all your hatred!

--l2hate, 23-Sep-2004

"And I think that's a bit too big a price to pay to the starving artists (who, by the way, would be a lot less starving if the producers and distributors screwed them less)."

True, but you could have avoided the hostile response by not including 'content producers' (ie artists) in the title of your entry. What have they ever done, apart from entertain you (for free, by the sound of it)?

Do you actually know what Irony is by the way?

--RedLeader, 23-Sep-2004

Oops, bugger. I originally meant "producers" in the movie/recording industry sense, meaning the guys who pour the money into the whole thing (i.e the media corporations and the lot. I didn't realize my mistake until you pointed it out. After all, English is not my primary language. Didn't mean to include the artists... Oh well, it's out. No can do. :-/

--JanneJalkanen, 24-Sep-2004

In english, 'producer' can also mean 'make' as well as control finances etc. Like 'that letter you produced'.

'I didn't realise my mistake until you pointed it out' in your reply is sarcasm by the way, not irony ;)

I'm not this pedantic normally - honest. Sorry :)

Like the rest of your blog, by the way (no sarcasm intended).

--RedLeader, 24-Sep-2004

Actually, it was meant neither as sarcasm nor irony - it was really the truth! :)

--JanneJalkanen, 25-Sep-2004

More info...     Comments?   Back to weblog
"Main_blogentry_220904_1" last changed on 22-Sep-2004 18:48:52 EEST by JanneJalkanen.