Record execs whining that the BBC recording then distributing a work which is out of copyright is 'unfair'.
Recording Industry :icon19:
the 'unfair' argument is weak. the BBC paid to record those symphonies, just like deutsche grammophon or anyone else, only they gave them away at loss, which they're entitled to do. there's no law says you have to charge for what you offer people
Record execs whining that the BBC recording then distributing a work which is out of copyright is 'unfair'.
Recording Industry :icon19:
the 'unfair' argument is weak. the BBC paid to record those symphonies, just like deutsche grammophon or anyone else, only they gave them away at loss, which they're entitled to do. there's no law says you have to charge for what you offer people
weak? it's beyond weak. it's completely barren of even a semblance of what is good for society. this is the type of thing record companies, if at all, should be discussing in private like cirgarette companies and nicotine... no one is taken by the argument and everyone is taken aback by their absurd claims. releasing music to the public by a composer whose work has been in the public domain for centuries is wrong? it might as well be wrong to download an e-book of Plato's Republic because electronic media has an 'unfair' advantage over printed media.
Record execs whining that the BBC recording then distributing a work which is out of copyright is 'unfair'.
Recording Industry :icon19:
the 'unfair' argument is weak. the BBC paid to record those symphonies, just like deutsche grammophon or anyone else, only they gave them away at loss, which they're entitled to do. there's no law says you have to charge for what you offer people
