Yes it is, as is a pair of trousers and a dinner plate. I realize that a2f2a has a limited focus – one area of worker to worker concerns – that area being music and the industry that surrounds it. I also realize that, unlike trousers and dinner plates, music is capable of being transferred through a digital medium. This results in a different set of circumstances for worker (musician) compensation. I don’t, however, believe the answer to the problem is to embrace concepts that have proven so destructive for the working class. Surely we can do better.

Thanks for introducing class war into the conversation. Very helpful.

A CD is a product with a worker at each end.

I’m a throwback that still buys my music on CDs. Janis Ian points out that you can drink water from a fountain for free but the bottled water industry still generates billions of sales per year. Do fans attend concerts? Yes. Do they pay for their tickets? Yes. Does the artist get paid for the performance? Yes. I think it was Lightnin’ Hopkins that refused to record anything unless he was paid cash in hand. This is where Fred’s argument of a contractual approach to getting paid makes more sense to me. For example – I worked for a year replacing sewers in Austin. Should I get a royalty everytime someone walks into McDonalds and uses the crapper? Should I send the city of Austin a bill every month for my cut of water & sewer collections? Of course not. I was paid at the time of my labor an amount that I agreed upon. It is not suprising to me that artists work to provide for themselves and their families. I never said anything different. But I think when you ask for a 70 year monopoly on availability you enter the realm of the owner class. Corporations have used IP as a means to kill people. This s not drama. Look at the history of Africa, AIDS, the pharmaceutical companies, and GATT. The problem being addressed here, as I understand it, is how to set up a new system of compensation for artists that will work for both artist and fan. Not how to extend and expand old concepts of privalege and punishment. I understand that touring, an imbedded part of the current income stream for artists, can create difficult situations in family situations. You know what? So does long distance truck driving. The solution for truck drivers is to look for local work or find a new profession. Not to collect a royalty payment for 70 years on every load they ever delivered. It surprises me that artists have not approaced such social networks as youtube with the idea of live performances (from home, studio, or venue) for broadcast over the network at a contracted fee. Upon delivery (and payment) the performance becomes a part of the social archive. (the truck driver analogy being “local delivery”) Or other such ideas of a work/pay scenario that are more compatible with how most of us live our lives. IP is the most devastating tool in the arsenal of tricks used to widen the gap between poverty and extreme wealth. Offering it up as a “solution” will do nothing to build a means of trust. How does a common man or woman trust someone who aspires to the owner class? Maybe a subject line examining the social relationship between artist and fan is needed to build on that trust.

Thanks for the topic I will go there.

Radio stations don’t buy CDs. They get them for free.

A painting is a commodity. A truck is a commodity.

The key thing is the connection. The company pays for the line to be connected to their customers. The radio station pays for the music to be connected to their customers.

I’ve opened a topic about this if you want to carry on this argument. See ‘Why artists get paid by radio’

The Business pay for the phone and installation as a commodity.

The service they pay for each month are the connection, the line maintenance and call center that the phone company provides (there are even more services but these 2 should be enough for this). If the phone company goes out of business they have no phone connection.

Music
The radio station pays for it once as a commodity. They don’t need anything else from the musician to play that music. If the Musician goes out of business the radio station will not be affected.

A the phone service is an ongoing work exchanged for money. With music the musician doesn’t give anything more to the deal, doesn’t add value. The music adds value but so do a lot of other things.

A business buys artists paintings, opens a gallery where the business makes money. No paintings, no viewers, no money. Does the business have to pay the painters more than just buying the painting?

The paintings are no more or less a service than music. The music once it’s recorded is a commodity not a service.

A trucking business needs trucks but they only pay for them once, the trucks are a commodity not a service.

Just because your product is needed for a business to make money doesn’t mean the product is a service.

I meant I wouldn’t starve because I live in a country where I can get social security. I was just trying to be a bit less melodramatic.

So you’re saying if you stopped working, you still wouldn’t starve? Sounds like you have it pretty good. I’m not clear why an artist who doesn’t continue to do work should continue to receive money.

Surprisingly, musicians also work to provide basic needs for ourselves and our families. If I stopped doing gigs, I wouldn’t starve, but I would have to get another job. Please remember that the next time you download a free music file. Or is free music a privilege you reserve for yourself?

Just this guy,

You are confusing the way you consume music with the way a music radio station uses music. For a radio station, music is a service, not a commodity; they need in order to make money, just like a company needs a phone line. Without one, the company would find it difficult to communicate with suppliers and find customers. It is a service that they need in order to make money

The company buys the phone and has it installed. Now, according to your view, that should be it. The phone should now be free to use, because its already been paid for. However, the company need the service to be there everyday to connect them to clients. It’s fully automated, the engineer doesn’t have to come down every time they want to make a call, yet they still pay the phone company a fee for each use.

Music radio stations are similar in that they too need my service on a daily basis. They don’t call me into the studio every time they want to play my song – that would be too expensive, the equivalent of calling out the engineer every time you used the phone. Instead, they play a recording of me singing that song and pay me a fraction of what it would cost to get me into the studio playing live.

They are happy to pay for the service as it attracts the audience that they need in order to sell advertising to make money. No music = no listeners = no advertising = no money, just like no phone line = no communication = no customers = no money.