[QUOTE=Miller]
There’s also zero investment expense. Cutting an album is a bit more pricey. Making a movie infinitly more so. Who’s going to bankroll films, if they can’t turn a profit from it?
[/QUOTE]
There are people who do so now.
I just find it annoying when someone says that art doesn’t get created without some sort of financial reward. For some art, that might be true. For other arts, it isn’t. Some people make art, and spend a lot of money doing so, without any hope of getting it back.
[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
There are people who do so now.
[/quote]
Such as?
I don’t think any one is claiming that, if there were no money in it, nobody anywhere would ever make any art. But the fact is, if people can’t support themselves with their art, they’re either going to stop making that art, or they’re going to have to vastly reduce their output to accomodate whatever it is they do to put food on their table. A lack of enforceable copyright laws wouldn’t kill the arts completely. But it would certainly cripple them.
I don’t think any one is claiming that, if there were no money in it, nobody anywhere would ever make any art. But the fact is, if people can’t support themselves with their art, they’re either going to stop making that art, or they’re going to have to vastly reduce their output to accomodate whatever it is they do to put food on their table. A lack of enforceable copyright laws wouldn’t kill the arts completely. But it would certainly cripple them.
[/QUOTE]
So, again, it’s a good thing that no one is arguing for that.
[QUOTE=Leaper]
No one HERE. But some do (wish I had some specific links - just trust me on this one).
[/QUOTE]
What the HELL does that have to do with anything? Some people want all black people sent back to Africa; some want sex with children legalized. How does the inclusion of extremes that are outside the rational boundaries of this discussion in any way move it forward? That’s not just a strawman; that’s a 50-foot strawman soaked in gasoline and lit with a torch.
[QUOTE=Stratocaster]
But you might just as well have made the same comparison with any other merit badge. “Am I the only person who takes this as an indication that the Scouts are more interested in teaching the children how to pull defenseless fish from a mountain stream than they are in teaching them (the Boy Scouts, not the fish) tolerance for others?,” you might also have posted. There’s a merit badge for golf, for bird watching, for basketry, for environmental science, for swimming, for bugling, for canoeing, and for rifle shooting. You could craft a similarly befuddled OP comparing each of these to the BSA stance on homosexuality. And each would seem a bit of a red herring.
If you have a bitch with their stance on gays (many do, of course), say so. Why this activity patch would have set you off is what seems incongruous, to me at least.
[/QUOTE]