Black March
This post was inspired by a comment I was going to make on a friend's Live Journal post.
http://willowanderer.livejournal.com/556432.html?style=mine&nc=2#comments
I asked a very similar question, just recently, I had found this Used book and music seller in Hamilton on James St. N. Great place, great guy, we sat and talked til closing time lol.
I asked 'What about used book sellers and libraries?' I really don't like Dan Brown, ever since I listened to "The Da Vinci Code" but thankfully I was able to listen and form an opinion without directly lining his pockets, but borrowing the audio book from the Library. I use the library like that for a lot of things. I hear something good about Neil Gaiman, so I borrow the book before I buy, now I know I like Neil and I buy his stuff all the time. I knew I liked the Sharpe's TV series, but that didn't mean I'd like the rest of Bernard Cornwell's writing. I like John Grisham novels after they're made into movies, prior to that though, as far as I'm concerned the man can't write. So I borrowed "Gallows Thief" by Bernard Cornwell and enjoyed it. The same happened with "The Last Kingdom" Now I own almost the complete set of the Saxon Stories (he just came out with a new book "Death of Kings") and I'm looking forward to getting more of his stuff. We're friends on Face Book now, and when he befriended me, he expressed his appreciation for my support.
Which leads to my next point. As an aspiring writer I also wonder how do you draw that line, yes you want to chastise the conglomerates for pushing for draconian laws, but you don't want to hurt the artists, performers and writers you love. The publishing world (and frankly its all one form or another of publishing) is changing, whether its music, literature or film. Artists are, if motivated, able to self publish, and depending on format, even cheaper than the production houses, but it means taking time away from the creative aspect of their work and devoting it to the intricacies of website setup and maintenance, book keeping, domain security et cetera. When you consider that many an artist often works at another job to make ends meet this extra work can become a major interference in their creative output. Hence, publishing houses, record companies, production companies came into being to free up the artist from the hassles associated. The fact that their costs have increased is a reflection not only of the ongoing inflation that is typical in life, but of the waste that can creep into any system where overhead and accounting for the cost of things becomes a necessity.
As soon as someone has a job that is not directly associated with the production of a product but instead in minimising costs and maximising output/profit (and these are not bad things, no one I know purposefully goes into business to lose money from their own pocket) bureaucracies begin to form and while China as an Empire (and it still is an empire, even if it doesn't have an emperor) has done rather well by the bureaucratic system, it still is prone to wastefulness because resources are directed away from production into oversight.
I've worked in construction, for small companies with a few employees. There the boss is often on-site with the crew, doing the work of production, and if not, he or she is off finding more work. As soon as management stops being hands on active in those functions, all sorts of troubles raise their heads. A foreman who doesn't actually share in the work becomes an overseer and is despised by his crew. An employer who is not seen to 'get his hands dirty' (excuse the implied sexism) is seen as the same and is viewed as the same by his employees.
What is, in a sense a necessary division of labour, from that of the physical kind to that of the more cerebral becomes a class division that can often obscure the realities of the situation.
What has this to do with Black March? A lot, Black March as I see it is a boycott to send a message to those 'suits' who are perceived as profiting unduly from the labour of others and attempting to impose draconian laws for the protection of their copyright.
Copyright came into existence to protect the work of the author, composer, or artist who produced something that others wanted. In the past, publishers paid the author for the work once. If they did well on the piece, they profited mightily, if the piece did not sell they were only out the initial investment.
Intellectual property rights have gone a long way now. I recall seeing Thomas Dolby posting something about a Wapsisquare cartoon once, that featured a few of his lyrics. Not enough I suppose to be considered in violation of the 'sampling' rules, but a significant phrase that anyone who knew the song “She Blinded Me With Science” would recognise that the main character 'Monica' was listening to the song on her headphones. Now I can appreciate that Mr. Dolby has concerns about others using his work without either referencing him or paying him, but the fact is, this was for him, free advertising. When Paul Taylor (aka
Pablowapsi) used those words, it reminded me of Dolby's song and made me want to hear it again, so I called up the local radio station to see if I could get them to play, luckily it was a college radio station and they actually had a live DJ on site who could put it on. My point here is, there is a fine line between plagiarism or unethical use of someone's work and what is now called 'sampling' or giving or making an homage to another's work.
In the movie “Dog Soldiers” there are several homages, one of which is “There is no spoon” which if you know your 'Matrix' you recognise. The line is said in reference to a character, with the sobriquet of Spoon, who has just been killed, but it is also a reference to the movie “The Matrix” which the writers and director loved. If excessive copyright protection were invoked on all these occasions, no one would be able to seriously reference anyone without breaking down the whole artistic mode. Copyright is important, but not to the point that it interferes with creative production. A careful balance must be found, that is a given. People should be paid for the work they do. However, intellectual property rights should not become a stifling effect on the creative process, for if it does, then we will have taken another step down the road to a new Dark Age, just as Jane Jacobs predicted.