|
|
Exploring Our Matrix
(Return to my home page) : Blog Home : March 2005
Everyone has a hobby. Some people collect stamps. Some watch sports. Some bungee jump. I'd like to propose a new one you may want to try: learning languages. While bungee jumping may be exhilarating, it won't help you if you bump into someone that doesn't speak English. Learning languages as a hobby can also alleviate the stress of a long commute or traffic jam. There are these fantastic Pimsleur tapes that let you learn in the car, without using a book. Just listen and repeat. The pace is slow, and if you are already good at languages it might seem too slow at times. But the repetition is crucial. I am amazed that, just listening during my short 10 minute commute to and from work, even just twice a week, I've made pretty good progress! I highly recommend it.
File sharing, music downloads, and intellectual property I have given much thought to the recent debates about file sharing. I am the author of a book, and thus concerned with royalties. I am also a classical music fan, and eager to discover new music. I do not, you may be surprised to hear, find these two parts of my person to be in conflict. My book is an academic one, and I know two things. First, that most of the people who read it will check it out of a library. Some poor research students will photocopy large chunks of it. On the other hand, those who really want their own copy and can afford it will get one, even if it is available in their local library. The same is true with music. I have downloaded and copied lots of music, it it is true. I listen to new things by either downloading them, or borrowing them from the library. If I copy something and don't buy it, there is one thing I can tell you: it is not something I would have bought even if it could not be downloaded or copied! The argument that every piece of copied music is a lost sale is a fallacy. I have accepted a free CD from a mail-order company at times. Why? Because it was free! Did I enjoy it? No! Would I have bought it anyway? SURELY NOT! You can see what is wrong with the argument. Music downloading is not like stealing from a CD store. It is like checking out things from your local library. If you don't like it, you can still check it out there any time you like. If you do like it, you may still want to listen a few times to decide whether it is worth $18. If you really like it, you will probably want to own a copy. Much of the music I own I first heard either through libraries or through music downloads. Those who oppose music downloads are sure to go after public libraries next, since there too you can hear their music without paying for it yourself. The problem, they will realize sooner or later, is that most of us will not pay $18 or more for something we have never heard. In the case of classical music, it would often mean paying $22 for music by someone whose music I've never heard before. If the big music companies prevent file sharing, and then go on to close the libraries, this will simply drive customers to bargain labels like NAXOS and closeout suppliers like Berksire Record Outlet. If that's what they want, then I guess they can go ahead, but I can't see that this will help their business much! I may be wrong about this - and I welcome feedback. But as far as I can see, if things were different and I couldn't listen to music copied from a local library over and over again, I would not own all the CDs I do with music by Atterberg, Korngold, Bax, and many other composers I've come to love. And not only would that not be a good thing for the music industry, but I would have missed out on wonderful music too! I've just placed an expensive order for CDs by Braga Santos, Klami, and Tveitt. How often do you hear them on the radio? Fortunately for the music industry, there were other ways I could try out their music, and it led to purchases.
|