From: ramirez.Princeton.EDU!penrose (Christopher Penrose)
Subject: Re: Make Sampling Legal...
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 03:05:18 GMT

# 1 1 6 writes
> gtaylor@vme.heurikon.com (Gregory Taylor) writes:
> 
> > Having gone to some length in a previous posting to create situations
> > which would lead one to accept the notion of propriety and ownership,
> > I'll have to say that it would seem to me that one of the reasons that
> > more radical attacks on this comfortable notion that you "own" what you
> > "do" in a world which has democratized your access to the technologies
> > of production, reproduction, and distribution are greeted with such
> > exceptional hostility is NOT that they strike at your potential livelihood
> > as the "next big thing" with a synth [putting aside the only thinly
> > veiled bits of ah....exclusionism I read in the attacks on (c)rap,
> > which ISN'T MUSIC], but on the notion that one's unconsidered and
> > cherished notions of "self" force-fed by consumer culture may be under
> > attack. Asking these kind of questions to a network full of young men
> > [mostly] who fervently believe that we're seated on the top of the
> > resource usage pyramid solely on the basis of our own merit and efforts
> > is, I think you may agree, to invite the kind of nose-cone full of 
> > testosterone that the "you leaches (sic) make me want to puke" school seems
> > to have dished up in large measure.
> > 
> 
>  
> Your posts always seem very cryptic to me.  They have an outward 
> appearance of being interesting, then when I get into them I get 
> thoroughly confused.  If I understood you correctly, you've said that you 
> beleive that certain 'artists' who copywrite their material are doing so 
> not because they are concerned about a financial loss due to 
> appropriation of their product, but because they feel as if the 
> 'stealing' of their work somehow equates to the stealing of their 
> character or soul, much like those natives somewhere who wont let you 
> take photographs of them.

I think that Gregory was not specifically speaking of artists, but of people
on this network who favor copyright law.  I interpret his claims, and I enjoy  
his dialectic, that originality is a facade for our insecurity toward our  
interdependencies.  Discrimination is an important mental construct in American  
commercial society.  This consumer *individuality* can be traced to particular
corporations that an individual patronizes:  whether they are Indie record  
labels, organic food growers, or Bongo jeans.  Even "alternative" or counter
culture is steeped in consumer products that have incestuous ties to society
at large.  Dependency is inescapable.  Originality is collective.

Gregory also seems to be willing to entertain the merits of individual
information ownership and communal ownership.  Although I applaud this, I am
quite livid with the current state of affairs and I tend to find copyright
restrictions an aesthetic straight jacket.  I am a composer myself, and I am
tired of watching over my shoulder.  Currently, my music is available nearly
for free.  As soon as networks big enough are available,  I'll probably choose
to distribute my music totally free of my current media and labor costs.  As
for sampling "my" works, I do the same.  I can't rightly have a problem with
it.  If someone takes an entire work of mine, claims ownership and somehow
makes oodles of money, then I probably can also, with the same piece.

Christopher Penrose
penrose@silvertone.princeton.edu