Scott Henderson Sounds off on Internet/Music Business

[degenaro]

Actually, some artists do exactly that. Prince did it. Didn't Trent Reznor? I think Radiohead or some such band did it as well. I can't remember the names of the acts off of the top of my head.

quote]
Famous last words.... [/quote]


prince, trent reznor and radiohead are on a WAY different level of selling music than scott henderson. scott plays small jazz clubs, prince plays the suberbowl. you cant compare apples to oranges just because they are both musicians.[/quote]
Well, lets see here...
Reznor I seem to remember was a hoax, Prince changed is model to sell his last cd at Target only, and Radiohead from what I understand considered their down load experiment a failure.

 

[degenaro]

Good point, but if w keep with the initial example.
I left the band and the band split into 2 separate bands, either of them still having pretty much the same draw yet fetching 1800 less.
In the end it doesn't affect me, but I find it still fucked.

OK, well in your example didn't you say that the other bands were drawing less?

Either, I know what you are getting at.

The scenario that you are putting forth (I believe) is you draw $2500 and the place is packed. Then another band comes in (lets say for arguments sake you didn't leave town, but you are trading weeks with another band) and says they draw the same, but will take $700 rather than $2500. Well first of all, if the COULD get $2500 and say they will only take $700 then they are idiots! But say they harbor some animosity towards you. Lets say they are trying to sell amps on eBay and find out that you are a rig-talk member And their goal is to muscle you out of the picture permanently. Well first of all the people will want variety and will eventualy get sick of the same band week after week, but lets ignore that.

So at this point, you have a couple of choices:
1) Undercut them. Offer to do the gig for $500 - not an attractive option obviously. However, if you can endure the pain, maybe you can muscle them out long enough so that they have a gig somewhere else and then renegotiate with the bar. Still, not the most attractive solution.
2) Go to another bar. Tell them what you were getting and what you were drawing. Don't mention the new band, or anything. Offer the bar "I can get my old crowd in here. We were getting a % of the door, up to $2500. We will play here, and we will take a % of the door, up to a max of $1500 for a month. After that we can renegotiate" Or something like that.

Even if the club owners talk and he comes back to you and says no way, then you can tell him "well thats what they are asking. Not everyone gets the best deal. If I am a car dealership and I have 1 model Mercedes for sale for $30k and the other ones are $37k, just cause one guy bought the $30k one doesn't mean they all sell for $30k. THe other ones have different options, etc. to distinguish them. That other band is booked solid. You can go with us and work with us and we can get you a packed bar on the weekends, and you keep all the liquor sales and it costs you nothing, or you can go with someone else that may be cheaper, but won't bring in as much in liquor sales. Its your choice."

Depending on the market that might work. You can be mad at that other band for putting you in that position, but thats competition man. You were in a monopoly position and someone came along and took that away.

Now if your town is filled with bands and they are all charging $700, then maybe you were over charging for the market. It happens. Its all about supply and demand. With a greater supply the higher the price goes, the less demand there is. If you are truly offering something superior for the money, then thats justification for you, and you have to sell the club on that. Convince them that you deserve the extra $$$ because you offer them greater liquor sales that will more than offset the cost.

3) Move on to a different town. I dont mean move 200 miles, but play bars on the other side of a major metropolitan city. Generally speaking here in Atlanta the cover bands usually have a "territory" where they play. It's not because of a territorial environ, but more if you do weel in one club, the others nearby hear about it and will want to have you play as well. So you end up in a small area of town, with ventures out every once in a while. Original bands will sometimes play local suburb clubs, but most play the clubs downtown, that generally don't do cover bands. So if your "territory" it the northern suburbs, then you move to the western suburbs.

So you give them a reason or justification for why they should want you and not the other guys, and why getting you at $xxxx dollars is a good deal for them (greater value and greater return), you move around a bit, or maybe you were getting paid what was good for the market at one point, but not good now that there is more competition.

IOW, don't get mad, get competitive. If you've got the draw, go about it smartly and you will prevail in the end.

Around town here, coverbands are in it for the money. Otherwise they'd be doing originals. No cover band is going to play for free unless its some sort of "we play for free 1 friday night so you can see if you like us, then after that you pay". Original bands is another story. Hell for original bands there are still some club owners/bookers trying to do the pay-to-play thing. Those are the ones that you want to stay away from!

In a nutshell...a matter of only so many places for a given genre. That said, not my problem since I moved. Just was trying to illustrate...

 

[moltenmetalburn]

I agree with this.

I have over 1000 metal albums. When i find things that are truly inspiring I buy the record and or go see the band live. If i had to pay 15 dollars for every CD I have the sad truth is I would only own the top 50 or so that I consider legendary. That would result in me not even hearing most of the bands I have wound up financially supporting over the years. Their loss entirely.

You can't afford to pay for the majority of music you seemingly like, yet claim to support them...financially?

Actually I said I would never have been able to afford my collection as a whole which is true. once again the bands I get that I really like I support by going to their shows and buying a t shirt. I obviously haven't gone to see every band or bought 1000 t shirts. ten bucks in the bands pocket at the end of the night is supporting them financially.

For me the sincerest form of flattery and support for a band these days is buying merch. you become a walking advertisement for the band and most of the merch money goes in pocket. most of the artists on larger labels I work for make less than 1 dollar per albums sold, some as little as 8 cents! In no way do I feel bad for downloading their album, I could care less about the corporate machine being a little less rich. the band can go home with ten dollars for each t shirt. buying all of your albums is just feeding the record industry machine. Id rather financially support the actual bands I like , and do.

How many of the bands you like are on larger labels? And yes for that buck they make on every cd some one else is laying the money out that for folks like Henderson comes out of their own pocket. That whole logic makes zero sense to me... in order to justify not having bought a cd for 15 bucks you bought a shirt for 20?

Many of the bands I like are on larger labels. Like I said I could care less about the majors and the money they spend out of pocket. No label ever truly has the artists best interests in mind. If they did they'd probably pay you enough to live Instead of keeping bulk profits for themselves. I don't justify not buying the discs, as I stated earlier I could care less so I need no justification IMO. A buddy of mine has 30,000 albums he downloaded over the last 8 years that I am in the process of copying, I have no qualms about doing this. What I was saying was that when I find a band that I really do like I choose to support them and IMO the best way to do that, the most profitable for the artist is merchandise.

what about buying a record that sucks, no refund available from the band or label, they could care less if you actually like it once you've purchased it.

What a lame argument, like the majority of artists don't have a way to give you a sampling of what you can expect.

Your opinion might be that my argument is lame but is it untrue? Where can you listen to every song on an album in its entirety before you buy? If you do know of a place I haven't heard of it. Do you buy food at the store without knowing whats in the package? Clothing without knowing the color? etc...

I consider low bit rate downloading the taste test, if i like it I get the full entree for sure. Im damn sure not gonna buy it to find out! at minimum wage that can equal a third of a days work.

So you steal it...great, lets just go with this then. Actually why not steal everything we can't afford...

The product I download is not the product for sale in the store. i haven't stolen an album, I have been given a copy for personal use for free by someone else who has broken the copyright laws. no theft at any point occurred.

are you aware that if you own a cd it is entirely legal to make a copy for a friend for "research" as long as you don't sell it to them?

didn't these down loadable mp3s all start as a rip from the original purchased material? By that admission shouldn't all of my friends all over the world who share their music with me fall under the legal guidelines? What do the people who upload from their purchased copies gain? nothing. Can you absolutely prove that if a person downloads a copy of your record that they have zero intent to ever buy it? No, you cannot so define what you have lost...possible revenue?

The law recognizes that many uses of copyrighted works -- even without the permission of the copyright holder -- are not an infringement. While there is no "right" as such to make a fair use, the making of such a use is not an infringement.

Thus, if you make copies for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, it is not an infringement of the copyright, even if the copyright holder does not want you to do so.

as for your theft claims, well our lawmakers don't see it that way and neither do I.

The RIAA, MPAA and copyright holders describe P2P users as "pirates" - invoking images of swashbuckling pre-teens hauling up the Jolly Roger and stealing intellectual property in the dead of night. New ads announced by MPAA President Jack Valente impress the idea that "copying is stealing" and that someone who burns MP3s is no different from those who slip a CD under their shirt at the local Tower Records.

But technically, file sharing is not theft.

A number of years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a man named Dowling, who sold "pirated" Elvis Presley recordings, and was prosecuted for the Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property. The Supremes did not condone his actions, but did make it clear that it was not "theft" -- but technically "infringement" of the copyright of the Presley estate, and therefore copyright law, and not anti-theft statutes, had to be invoked.

So "copying" is not "stealing" but can be "infringing."

But yes I'd be all for 128 DLs as a taste test and me selling it at 196 or above as oppossed to the DLs being 256 and above and me selling at 128 and 196...

I for one put my own music on torrent boards for anyone to have. Its great exposure!

likely, but what exactly are you exposed to? Folks taking stuff for free and do what? Are they coming to see you? Buy merchandise?

In my experience with some of the larger artists I worked with who leaked their own record via torrent prematurely, we saw increased sound scan numbers which in turn increase concert attendance. was it a definitive study, no did it seems to actually help the band , yes.

Music Is an Art form. IMO all music has exactly the same value; emotional response. Making it in the music business has nothing to do with art. It is entirely business which is typically cutthroat. If you play music to make money you are missing the point IMO, but to each their own. How many of you can actually say you chose to play in order to make a living at it?

Yeah sure, and we all love each other. Yes, ideally music would be an art form, but afaic most of it falls under craft. Especially nowadays...
Actually, ideally... music would be a form of communication, a language if you will. Except most folks most willing to do it for free have the equivalent of a junior high vocabulary and ideas...

Music is an art form, no contest. Its medium is sound. The world need not be perfect for this to be true. My mother who has a Masters in Art has beaten this into my head since I got my first guitar. you don't have to agree but i don't even want to waste my time elaborating as it can get long winded.

Just imagine if their were no way to record music. the "product" would no longer exist and the sole purpose would once again be the entertainment of people through emotional response.

the concept of intelligent property exists whether you write it on paper, or press to disc, mp3 whatever.
The idea of "what if" is ludicrous.

The idea of what if is ludicrous? Are you aware every single technological advancement mankind has ever made started with the fleeting thought "what if?" Not at all ludicrous IMO.

Intelligent property as defined by wiki "is a term referring to a number of distinct types of legal monopolies over creations of the mind, both artistic and commercial, and the corresponding fields of law. Under intellectual property law, owners are granted certain exclusive rights to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions; and words, phrases, symbols, and designs."

This once again is business not art, as music is art I find it has no place being sullied by business. My opinion.

We must agree to disagree. No hard feelings!

I for one am praying the record industry comes crashing down as a whole. Id like to see it done away with and the art returned to its purest form. that will probably never happen but I may continue to dream, until then ill be creating music because it moves me.

 

[brett212]

I for one am praying the record industry comes crashing down as a whole. Id like to see it done away with and the art returned to its purest form. that will probably never happen but I may continue to dream, until then ill be creating music because it moves me.[/quote]

Well, I for one am praying that your place of work comes crashing down and you lose your income and whatever material stuff you deem worthy of paying for. It certainly isn't music in it's recorded form, but then, by your own estimation the recorded form isn't the "purest" version of the art, only live performance. Do you have any idea how expensive it is for an independent artist to tour? Obviously not. Stop buying the t shirts and start buying the albums.

 

[brain21]

Cool. So I can steal from you if its just a hobby? If you ride harleys on the weekend as a hobby can I steal yours?

Your "situation" isn't any different, just your outlook.

Regardless of whether you thinks it is stealing or not, regardless of whether its a hobby or not, regardless of what you expect, it's either stealing, or it isn't. IOW, if its stealing from Scott Henderson, then its stealing from you. If its not stealing from him then it's not stealing from you. Regardless. The only exception would be if you deliberately gave your stuff away for free.

If it makes you feel good about it to call it stealing, then yes, it's O.K. The thing is, if I give it to you, it's a little silly calling it stealing. It's a hobby, I'm giving it away. Nobody has to steal from me, it's free.

The outlook may or may not be different, but the situation certainly is.

Note the last sentence in my quote that you used.

 

[brain21]

Reznor I seem to remember was a hoax, Prince changed is model to sell his last cd at Target only, and Radiohead from what I understand considered their down load experiment a failure.

OK, to a lesser extent Tom Petty is doing a form of this right now. Buy a concert ticket and get a free downloadable copy of his new CD.

 

[brain21]

Stop buying the t shirts and start buying the albums.

Huh? Was this meant as a joke or sarcasm? If so then I apologize, I missed it.

You buy an artists CD they get a couple of bucks. Thats it. You buy a T-Shirt, they get a LOT more. You buy a ticket, they get a lot more.

So if you have a choice, CD or Shirt, why would you suggest to stop buying the shirt? I mean if the goal is to contribute financially to the artist, which was what the other poster that you comment was directed to was trying to say (I believe).

Furthermore, for everyone out there, buy the T-Shirt on the artists website rather than at the venue. A shirt on an artists website for $20 will either cost the same $20 or will cost $25 at the venue. Venues take a cut out of merchandising sold at the venue. Some places up to 30%, which I think is highway robbery. So that extra $5 goes right to the venue, or the artist will pocket $5 less from a shit bought at the venue vs on the website. Most touring artists will have the same shirts on sale on their website during a tour these days.

 

[brett212]

"Furthermore, for everyone out there, buy the T-Shirt on the artists website rather than at the venue."

So, why can't you buy the cd from the artist's website? I'm talking about independent artists that have no label support for touring so the best they can do is spend their money producing a quality album and selling it directly from their site. Therefore, the money goes directly to the artist. The business model in place now is for artists to self-finance their own albums and hopefully recoup their expenses by selling them directly to the public and cutting out the middle men of the record industry. It works just as well as buying a t shirt, but as we all know you can't download a t shirt.
Stop trying to justify getting albums for free when you know you should be giving the artist something in return for them.

 

[moltenmetalburn]

Well, I for one am praying that your place of work comes crashing down and you lose your income and whatever material stuff you deem worthy of paying for. It certainly isn't music in it's recorded form, but then, by your own estimation the recorded form isn't the "purest" version of the art, only live performance. Do you have any idea how expensive it is for an independent artist to tour? Obviously not. Stop buying the t shirts and start buying the albums.

Sure do, I spend my life on the road... All of the artists I work for make ALL of their revenue on the road not from the record sales and the labels spend zero on touring for %90 of them. Its all out of pocket and the merch sales help them more than buying their album. I know this first hand and these are not even independent artists. They are on larger labels.

Maybe I should have elaborated, but In my eyes the best scenario for musicians is to cut out the middleman entirely. Direct to consumer sales would be the most profitable for them and IMO the best possible outcome for the music business and musicians interest.

thanks for the hate though, and sharing your opinion.

Edit: just saw your second post which kind of correlates with some what I just said, sorry for the redundancy.

as for the venue merch cut, yeah this absolutely disgusts me I feel the venue has absolutely no right to take merch cuts but typically they are huge, maybe I should consider buying solely from the internet but the truth is I have never bought any clothing with seeing it in person.

 

[degenaro]

"Furthermore, for everyone out there, buy the T-Shirt on the artists website rather than at the venue."

So, why can't you buy the cd from the artist's website? I'm talking about independent artists that have no label support for touring so the best they can do is spend their money producing a quality album and selling it directly from their site. Therefore, the money goes directly to the artist. The business model in place now is for artists to self-finance their own albums and hopefully recoup their expenses by selling them directly to the public and cutting out the middle men of the record industry. It works just as well as buying a t shirt, but as we all know you can't download a t shirt.
Stop trying to justify getting albums for free when you know you should be giving the artist something in return for them.

...is this you bg?

 

[brett212]

@Moltenmetalburn: No hate intended, but it was you who wrote "I for one am praying that the record industry comes crashing down as a whole". For those of us that are still trying to write original compositions and release them on albums that are self-funded, that statement carries a whole lotta hate. I think we're on the wrong track here as I get the feeling you're still talking about artists with management, some kind of label support and a reasonably well established fan base that allows them to go into certain markets with a level of certainty that they'll cover their expenses and perhaps even make a profit.
What I'm talking about is artists that have none of that but can still scrape together the funds to make a high quality album of original compositions and hopefully recoup their expenses by selling directly to the public from their own sites. The cd price can be much cheaper than a t shirt bought at a gig and will probably last longer. Notice I said "recoup". The hope of making a profit from an independent album let alone a professional living is definitely a long shot these days. I could release an album of demos with drum machines and me hacking away on a bass but like you, I care about the integrity of the art and want to have the real deal and I believe these guys should be paid for what they bring to the music so the price paid for the album contributes directly to the income of one of your fellow musicians, not a label exec in a new BMW.
It seems an arbitrary decision has been made by a large portion of the music-loving public that a cd should be available for free as a promotional device but a t shirt is well worth the $20? I don't agree with that but then again, if a person isn't directly involved in the process of making their own albums I can see how difficult it'd be to relate to the problem. That's why I made the crack about losing your job. It's easy to be dismissive about something if you're removed from the situation. If I was trying to explain this to someone that works in a cover band playing other people's creative work and makes a good living at it or, works primarily as a sideman and just has to show up at the gig while someone else worries about the bottom line, then I'd imagine their response would be "What's the problem? I'm making a few bucks doing gigs and there's all this "free", new music on the internet".

 

[kasperjensen]

Isn't the point of buying an artists CD (in terms of support), to let the record company know that there are people willing to part with their cash for their product?
I am sure they would be more approachable for new contracts if the band has paid off its advance...

Or has this already been said?

 

[moltenmetalburn]

@Moltenmetalburn: No hate intended, but it was you who wrote "I for one am praying that the record industry comes crashing down as a whole". For those of us that are still trying to write original compositions and release them on albums that are self-funded, that statement carries a whole lotta hate. I think we're on the wrong track here as I get the feeling you're still talking about artists with management, some kind of label support and a reasonably well established fan base that allows them to go into certain markets with a level of certainty that they'll cover their expenses and perhaps even make a profit.
What I'm talking about is artists that have none of that but can still scrape together the funds to make a high quality album of original compositions and hopefully recoup their expenses by selling directly to the public from their own sites. The cd price can be much cheaper than a t shirt bought at a gig and will probably last longer. Notice I said "recoup". The hope of making a profit from an independent album let alone a professional living is definitely a long shot these days. I could release an album of demos with drum machines and me hacking away on a bass but like you, I care about the integrity of the art and want to have the real deal and I believe these guys should be paid for what they bring to the music so the price paid for the album contributes directly to the income of one of your fellow musicians, not a label exec in a new BMW.
It seems an arbitrary decision has been made by a large portion of the music-loving public that a cd should be available for free as a promotional device but a t shirt is well worth the $20? I don't agree with that but then again, if a person isn't directly involved in the process of making their own albums I can see how difficult it'd be to relate to the problem. That's why I made the crack about losing your job. It's easy to be dismissive about something if you're removed from the situation. If I was trying to explain this to someone that works in a cover band playing other people's creative work and makes a good living at it or, works primarily as a sideman and just has to show up at the gig while someone else worries about the bottom line, then I'd imagine their response would be "What's the problem? I'm making a few bucks doing gigs and there's all this "free", new music on the internet".

Yeah you definitely hit the nail on the head on the types of artists I am referencing. after reading your post I can say I clearly understand your points and I don't disagree with you. I see that we are really discussing two different types of scenarios all together and my blanket statement would effect each differently in the long run. The truth is I am not exposed to too many underground/independant artists, all of my tours are artists that do have "management, some kind of label support and a reasonably well established fan base that allows them to go into certain markets with a level of certainty that they'll cover their expenses and perhaps even make a profit." My opinion was spoken from this very narrow focus. You have me looking at the topic from a different angle. Thanks for that.

For me these types of discussion are completely about entertaining others points of view. There is much to be learned by listening to each other. No one person has all the correct answers or opinions based on fact. No hard feelings to anyone, we are all entitled to our own opinions and mine are typically harsh...

 

[Bob Savage]

Note the last sentence in my quote that you used.

Which is what made it all the more confusing that you started off seeming confused at what I was stating. You seem to just want to rant, regardless of the point.

 

[brain21]

"Furthermore, for everyone out there, buy the T-Shirt on the artists website rather than at the venue."

So, why can't you buy the cd from the artist's website?
...
It works just as well as buying a t shirt, but as we all know you can't download a t shirt.
Stop trying to justify getting albums for free when you know you should be giving the artist something in return for them.

Whoah dude, WTF? I am not trying to justify getting albums for free at all! Back up for a sec! I do support independent artists, and I have bought either directly from the artists or through a place like CDBaby.com. Throughout the mid-late 90's I was one of those bands in the Atlanta area. We had day jobs to pay rent, but sold CDs at shows for $5 and often gave them away for free. These were, of course CDs that we spent thousands of dollars recording and then manufacturing. We sold shirts for $20 as well. We gave some of those away for free too. I know that situation - not to the extent of having to support a family off of that money, but I understand original indie band finances well enough.

But thanks for assuming that I don't and I am just trying to justify my own theft! It's always nice to have baseless conclusions drawn about yourself.

 

[brain21]

Note the last sentence in my quote that you used.

Which is what made it all the more confusing that you started off seeming confused at what I was stating. You seem to just want to rant, regardless of the point.

No, not at all. People were talking about "what you were doing" - IOW, they were referencing stuff that was not in this thread and not specifying. I was not sure, since it was no explained at all, what they were talking about. Rather than just assume one thing or another, I addressed a point and then added at the end that your situation may be different, essentially, because it was NOT 100% clear. And I'm not going to sit here and search through all of your posts on the forum to dig out a couple of posts that may or may not be relevant.

Also, I wasn't ranting, I was discussing. The tone I feel was even and calm. There IS a difference, but whatever....

Sorry if I am not 100% familiar with all of your posts and your entire history here. I didn't think that was required...

 

[PeteLaramee]

My buddy is a Physics Prof at Columbia in Chicago and he's also a musician. One of his students walked up to him and said, "hey I googled you and found your music. I have it all on my ipod and I've been listening to it almost everyday. I like it a lot."

My buddy says, "Thanks I'm glad you like it. Bring in one of the discs and I'll sign it for you."

His student then says, "Dude, paying for music is for suckers."

What more can I say?

 

[brett212]

@brain21 - my sincere apologies sir. Things get so re-quoted here that it's difficult to tell who the original poster was so once again, sorry for my misdirected statement. I very much appreciated your posts regarding classical composers too, very educational.
It's difficult to discuss this without it all getting heated depending on an individual's perspective. For the record, my position is that we have a very good business model in place for the purely independent musician/band to sell their wares (that includes albums) for a very fair price (much lower than stores) directly to the consumer and the consumer can feel good knowing that their hard-earned cash is going to the very people who's music they enjoy as opposed to a large, corporate entity.
I just hope future generations can be informed about this as it will ensure that a lot of great, high quality music will continue to be written and recorded to the highest degree possible, and it will keep a healthy industry in place for the many young musicians to inherit. If cd's are forever considered a free item then solo artists that compose music for ensembles will have no hope of recouping their expenses which will result in a long line of demos being the only thing released. Bands will still be able to function of course but I'm talking about individuals who aren't in a position to form a band and tour as they are the people most affected by this social phenomenon. There is no way to enforce it of course which would only turn people against it anyway. I really do believe (somewhat naively I suppose) that if people could know that the money was going to fellow musicians they would feel ok about parting with it.

 

[brain21]

@brett212 - I sincerely appreciate your post! And yes in long threads with reposts it can get confusing (just look at some of these posts, incl. mine!) NP in the misdirected statements - all clear, no harm, no foul. and thanks again for the clarification!

We have been kinda discussing a couple of different points in this thread. I think that it would be tragic not only for the artists, but for the "consumer of art" for the business/culture to end up in a place where people (everyone) think it is perfectly acceptable (or even accepted) to download whatever they want and not have to pay for it because "you just don't pay for music" (like the professor story). Thankfully in an industry full of doubt, defeat, and absolute lack of any vision, Apple, a company not even from that industry, came out with iTunes and proved them all wrong and showed that a majority of people ARE willing to pay, so long as it is reasonable and user friendly. THere is hope yet.

I also understand that it is not going to just go away either. I don't know how old you guys are, but I remember in the late 70's/early 80's sitting with a blank cassette tape in my parents stereo for an entire Sat. or Sun. afternoon ready to record off the radio the songs that I liked. It was actually a great way to spend a crappy, cold or rainy weekend when no one wanted to go outside and play. I remember going to college and everyone trading tapes of each others CDs. The point is there is a bit of human nature involved here in an insatiable appetite for more, more, more, and not paying for it cause you'd go broke. So the industry and artists should, in a sense, accept it and find ways to deal with it. And perhaps simultaneously, someone at Macrovision or PGP or Microsoft can come up with a real solution (actually, there is a real solution available, its just way too expensive right now, and not geared towards this specific application, and somewhat Big Brother-ish).

And I think the same ethos applies to gigging and other situations as well. Though not necessarily appropriate 100% of the time (cause sometimes you do have to and should actually fight for yourself), I think if roadblocks are thrown at us, we simply need to evaluate and develop an effective strategy(ies) to deal with the situation. The saying in business is "adapt or die" and it can apply in many contexts. Think about solutions to roadblocks and competition rather than just give up and harbor resentment (you'll probably live longer too ), and though easier said than done, try to take a look at the whole situation from an objective, outside position. THat often helps as well.

 

[Bob Savage]

No, not at all. People were talking about "what you were doing" - IOW, they were referencing stuff that was not in this thread and not specifying. I was not sure, since it was no explained at all, what they were talking about. Rather than just assume one thing or another, I addressed a point and then added at the end that your situation may be different, essentially, because it was NOT 100% clear. And I'm not going to sit here and search through all of your posts on the forum to dig out a couple of posts that may or may not be relevant.

Also, I wasn't ranting, I was discussing. The tone I feel was even and calm. There IS a difference, but whatever....

Sorry if I am not 100% familiar with all of your posts and your entire history here. I didn't think that was required...

Anything else? Surely you have more to say.