brandproductions wrote:Couldn't that same logic also be applied to the near downfall of the music industry several years ago? With everyone downloading music for free one could have argued that it was the industries time to die. However the artists and judicial system fought back and won. They didn't give up the right to be compensated for their art. They didnt give it away for free. They clung to the idea that their creations are worth something just as I feel a photographers art is worth something. Its tough to compare the business of art with the business of being a scribe. I agree with what skcphotography was trying to express and I think mnoble said it best. "...they are getting the use of an image for a pittance and some other photographer is not getting the work. If we give away what we create I do not think we are doing anyone a favor." Giving away, or allowing people to take our work for free is essentially shooting ourselves in the foot by creating a general feeling of disrespect towards an artists ownership of their product.
Actually, I was referring more to people wanting to give away their work for free or almost cheap rather than copyright theft. If someone uses your work, you are rightfully entitled to be paid for it. I have always been a strong proponent of that. However, someone earlier complained that there seemed to be no more market for their work because people were flooding the field with much cheaper work. (or actually even free). See the message right before mine from skcphotography. If there is a lack of market for photos because there is a lot of free or really cheap work out there, perhaps it's time for that market to die.
There will always be the outstanding photographers who get top dollar for their work, Frans Lanting, Kennan Ward, just to name two that live in my area (or former area, I moved.) I do not have the talent, skill, or drive to compete against them. However, for most photographers who do birds, nature, or even airshow work, that market is dead because there is too much out there that is a whole lot cheaper, and in my case probably better than what I produce.
In your music example, the proper example would be if there were something out there that allowed anyone to produce music that was comparable to 80 percent of the pop charts. And those people producing that music were willing to give it away for free because they liked having their music on the air. That would cause the market to collapse, and probably die. What you seem to be asking for is a favor of sorts. You don't want people to give away their art so that you can make money off of yours. If an artists work isn't worth the asking price anymore, why should anyone help them out?
Brian
As an aside, I take photos for myself. I don't sell them. If someone were to ask for publishing rights for cheap, it would have to be an organization I really believe in, and I would consider it a tax-deductible donation.