Virtues of plagiarism in metal

[I_Stab_People]

I'm quite intrigued by the public ownership of intellectual property in modern society. This has nothing to do with communist theory's "ownership of the means of production in common," but ownership based on merit.
For example, if Metallica produced shit under their band name, they don't deserve to be called "Metallica" anymore, some other band who can deliver the metal goodies can use that name instead.
The same goes for other intellectual properties, if Ian Flemming can't write good James Bond novels anymore, let other worthy writers be given the chance to write about the British spy. Public ownership renders the validity of licensing and copyrights null and void because commercial possession of intellectual properties is based on money and profits, not if any product has quality whatsoever.

[we hope you die]

This is not a problem of the products and the names, it's an issue of who's buying the music. Some people buy the shit Metallica albums not because they think it's good but because it's released under the name Metallica. Instead of knowing what they like, people just pick bands that may have released some cool stuff and then buy up everything they're ever released just because it's released under the same name. It's why i use the philosophy of following albums rather than bands, because the bands invariably fuck up at some point.  

[I_Stab_People]

Do you agree though that the legalization of piracy and unauthorized use of copyrighted materials will finally bring down the monopoly of those greedy, giant corporations who know nothing about art, music or literature and yet control the distribution and production of movies, records and books?
If MTV doesn't give dorks like Glenn Benton bread to pay the bills, will these posers still do it (make crappy albums)?

[1337Dude]

Legalization of piracy is a crazy matter, while it will remove the shitty artists from the music industry and will cause a downfall to MTV in one way or another, it might not motivate talented musicians to make music if they can't guarentee a living out of it.

[we hope you die]

That's a good point, no matter how much you claim that people should make music purely for artistic reasons, there is always a financial motive, however small.

[beyond_godlike]

People will still make music. Things will not change for the good musicians because their target audience will still be the same and they will keep buying their music. This is also similar to writing. There are thousands of writers out there, and most of them write for fun, not financial gain. Some sell some short stories to the local newspapers or magazines, but it's more of an added extra. If they're really good, some publishing company might see a manuscript they wrote and give them a publishing deal. Musicians maybe shouldn't make music as their main source of revenue, but it could be something they do at local places and maybe get paid a little while they're at it. Some record company executive could see them and decide to give them a recording deal.

[I_Stab_People]

Between those who do it purely for fun and surmounting artistic challenges and expectations from fans and metal critics, and those who do it for money and the fame, I think the former is a rare breed indeed. You could see these people working their asses off at a shitty day-job as grocery baggers and factory workers, playing in crappy joints, while the sell-outs get all the pussies and the moola. Such is the sacrifice of the true artist, as Steve Vai said, the only true concern of the guitar meister is to be intense.  

[Dionysius]

I'm quite intrigued by the public ownership of intellectual property in modern society. This has nothing to do with communist theory's "ownership of the means of production in common," but ownership based on merit.  
For example, if Metallica produced shit under their band name, they don't deserve to be called "Metallica" anymore, some other band who can deliver the metal goodies can use that name instead.
The same goes for other intellectual properties, if Ian Flemming can't write good James Bond novels anymore, let other worthy writers be given the chance to write about the British spy. Public ownership renders the validity of licensing and copyrights null and void because commercial possession of intellectual properties is based on money and profits, not if any product has quality whatsoever.

I agree with this. I think metal should be more like folk-music where the original artists are usually unknown and music is passed on from generation to generation. But then when I look at the shitty tribute albums that exist I wonder if such a statement holds much validity.

What do you think the external conditions should be for "plagiarizing" music?

[More Celt Than Sassenach]

I agree with this. I think metal should be more like folk-music where the original artists are usually unknown and music is passed on from generation to generation. But then when I look at the shitty tribute albums that exist I wonder if such a statement holds much validity.

What do you think the external conditions should be for "plagiarizing" music?

This was appropriate in the context folk music was written, but with the advent of recordable music is no longer needed.

[oscar the cat]

Nobody except the shithead ripoff bands like Behemoth are making any money in metal. It should be like folk music and classical, a cultural event not a profit-making one.

[Immolation]

Nobody except the shithead ripoff bands like Behemoth are making any money in metal. It should be like folk music and classical, a cultural event not a profit-making one.

Don't all orchestra's and performers nowadays play/record for money?

[kontinual]

Certainly they need to/do get paid, but the budgets of orchestras everywhere are falling into sinkholes, so apparently something isn't working.  The majority of muscians' payments  is not the result of some rock music-type pandering or cheap industry hype, but is meant to reflect their contribution as a member of the orchestra, which, as was said, carries recognizable cultural weight.

[Ageless_Stranger]

Yes, all of them.  Look at the seating prices if you want any proof.

[oscar the cat]

Don't all orchestra's and performers nowadays play/record for money?

You are having trouble understanding the difference between "getting paid" and doing something "for money." Compared to what they'd make in mainstream music, orchestras and artists are basically starving. They do get paid, but like a day job, not like massive wealth. Do you see the difference?

[oscar the cat]

Yes, all of them.  Look at the seating prices if you want any proof.

The seating prices usually pay only about 40% of less of the annual budget... go check out the annual report for the symphony of your choice if you don't believe me.