Re: Plunderphonic (was "disrespecting softwares")

[steve <studio_t@bellsouth.net>]

seems to me its a dual issue;  artistic and financial

on the financial end if someone uses thier resources(talent, time,
equipment/money) to create something and someone re-uses it for
financial gain they should be compensated
now there are of course grey area's and people incapable of seeing them
but regardless of what you do w/ it, it is still someone elses work and
just as you would rent a tool or pay a consultant, your work is eisier
or better for the use of it and you owe

remember I said there where grey area's

on an artistic level its as wide as the sky
I'll bet %30 of pop/rock music is direct ripoff/recyle WITHOUT sampling
some of this as homage or influence
and much of it just plain money grabbing ripoff
just cause you can copywrite it doesn't make it creative
just cause you had another musician play it doesn't mean it isn't for
all practical purposes a "sample"
its art if its art, regardless of technique of creation
remember htere was a time when people didn't  consider ANY photography
art
given the proliferation of digital equipment don't expect sampling to go
away
the very way many of us make music is changing, wether its groove
quantising or using midi phrase loops or sampling  alot of music is
being done w/ prewritten parts, I think its pretty iffy to say that
using a small groove sample in your music is dramatically different than
using twiddly bits, drumtrax or other methods of music generation

I think the differnce between MC hammer and john oswald is obvious don't
you