On 15/07/07, Karl Miller wrote:
> --- Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> *** A smart negotiator doesn't inflame a negotiation
> by asking for something he knows well the other party
> cannot ever, under any circumstances, deliver.
>
> Or as my father the attorney used to say, "don't waste
> your time trying to sue someone who can't pay."
>
> It seems to me that the business of being a musician,
> from the inception of recording, has been a history of
> diminishing returns. Is this "right." It depends on
> your prespective. If radio stations had to pay for
> live music, we wouldn't have music on the radio. If
> every theater had to have an orchestra, we wouldn't
> have music with our motion pictures, or incidental
> music with plays.
>
> If we did not have recordings we might attend concerts
> more often, and there might be more of them. We might
I think there are far more live concerts of all kinds today than there
were 100 years ago.
Just think of the giant music festivals such as Glastonbury, or Womad,
or the Edinburgh Festival.
> be used to paying more for our music...or would we
> listen as much? I rather think we would have a
> greater appreciation for the music we hear and would
> listen more carefully. But, with canned music, well
> the can has been opened.
>
> What I would find helpful in these discussions is
> information telling me how much of that money paid for
> a broadcast ends up in the musician's pocket. Also, is
> the payout process done through "statistically"
> correct surveys? Or as I like to think of it, the rich
> get richer syndrome.
>
> Karl
Regards
--
Don Cox
[log in to unmask]
