April 2005

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

« Manny will lose his job! Go see a movie! | Main | Netflix and Tivo: Movies On Demand »

September 11, 2004


Let me be the first to add myself to the list of critics. Looking at sampling from a purely free market standpoint can be good and bad, but granted useful as a starting point. Sellers should be able to set their selling price in a free market. However, a copyrighted work isn't exactly a freely traded commodity, is it? In essense, a copyright grants its holder a monopoly over a limited period of time. This can lead to problems. For instance, the copyright holder may simply not choose to license (or license at a prohibitively high value).

But who knows? Perhaps necessity will in fact force artists who currently use digital sampling to be more creative, better artists. I somehow doubt it. I do know that whatever the result on artist creativity, I find it hard to simply discount the "oddities" in the Bridgeport decision. Inconsistencies is a better term. And it's these inconsistencies that drive it's critics to write about it.

For a list of other critics check out:


me (in a previous blog entry)

The comments to this entry are closed.