Hello Fritz, Sorry, I didn't get it from the beginning and started this long and mostly useless argument. Your statement is great. I think there is nothing to add to this and probably it is a good point to discontinue this topic. At least I'm not going to argue anymore. Sunday, December 1, 2002, you wrote:
FF> But theoretically, the artist should get paid per listener. Or per FF> listening. With an intensity of listening experience factor. But there the FF> question arises: should the more intense listening be more expensive since FF> the listener gets more from the artist, or should it be cheaper as a FF> discount price, or to prevent misuse of inattentive listening?
This is actually the strangest point of view I ever heard.
FF> I should have made the irony operator more visible... FF> Peter, I am entirely of the same opinion as you. Seriously: the academic FF> system works somehow better with respect to monetary aspects. You are paid FF> on a regular basis and, in the optimal case, employed because some FF> extremely objective jury found that you are the ablest candidate. You FF> publish without directly getting paid for it, and there is a subtle FF> feedback mechanism which, again in the optimal case, assures that those FF> people who write good articles can make a living out of it because they FF> enjoy the regular occupation. And this mechanism works by no means FF> proportionally to the number of copies your articles sell, but also due to FF> a subtle mechanism including reputation of the journal, citation of your FF> work by whom, etc. FF> This system in practice can be critisised, too, but it is far more FF> efficient in guaranteeing quality of publications independent of broad FF> economic success and a reasonable and reliable economic basis for authors. FF> Plus it makes (via libraries which of course have to buy the expensive FF> journals) the articles available at almost zero cost for everyone; making FF> a Xerox copy for your use is perfectly all right with everyone. And who FF> would deny that the primary goal in the whole money-and-arts issue is to FF> give those artist who produce "good" work the opportunity to devote their FF> energies to creating art without worrying too much about getting your rent FF> paid? FF> There's at least one good thing in the pre-MP3-CD-ROM times system of FF> selling copies and passing a share of the price to the artist. It is the FF> coupling of consumer's preferences and the supplier's profit which FF> provides, like it or not, a strong incentive even for the artist, and a FF> powerful coordination mechanism which is at the core of the market economy. FF> Fritz FF> "If something is printed, then it is the property of everyone forever" FF> (Gotthold Ephraim Lessing) NP: Karayorgis & Pakula "Lines" (CD) -- Best regards, Peter Gannushkin e-mail: shkin@shkin.com URL: http://www.downtownmusic.net/