Music amongst my peers has always been a hot topic, everyone does compile their own collection and build it over the years. However, a lot do it differently than others do. As for my part, I have always been an advocate for paying for my music. I believe – as a creative artist myself – that if you choose to create content in order to make a living, it should be protected and therefore be paid for if you choose to make this your full-time job.
My go-to platform to download my songs is iTunes, as it is easily accessible and has a huge, diverse portfolio. As purchases for physical copies declined, iTunes stepped in an transformed the market – also might have accelerated the decline of physical copies. However, it has done a good deal at protecting the copyright for artists and pay them their fair share.
If iTunes would significantly loosen the copyright licenses, it would probably initiate the decline of content being produced. In order to produce content and to afford even just the most simple needs, some sort of compensation is crucial. As sad as it is sometimes, no money, no motivation in proceeding to produce content. Despite these limitations, stripping the money factor away from the music industry could also have it’s advantages. We probably all have heard about Kesha’s lawsuit against Dr. Luke and Sony. A lot of money is involved and where money plays a major role, it’s best friend ‘greed’ is just around the corner. Under a Creative Commons licence the music industry would most likely be a friendlier place, giving artists more creative room to express their artistry. The amount of content would, as a result, decline as artist would make their creative job a hobby on the side.
What do you think would be the consequences?