Robert Fripp and the teletubbies.

So, one thing that I have been reading recently is the online diary of Robert Fripp, best known as the husband of the blond lady from Teletubbies. Oh, and he played guitar in a band called King Crimson as well. I've always wondered what would possess someone to keep an online diary (writes the guy doing a blog...) and made a point of reading all of this years entry to get a feel for what he is trying to accomplish. And what has he accomplished? Well....

1. A complete visual encyclopedia of the small English town that he lives in - He takes pictures of the main street every time he walks down it. I can only imagine how much money he spent on film before the digital camera came along.
2. A pretty clear picture of how he feels about certain aspects of the music industry.

Fripp's company (DGM) were one of the first to be vocal about the rights of artists to keep their copyrights, instead of signing them over to publishers, record companies etc. He is currently taking time off from making music in order to prevent others from violating the copyrights to Crimson music that he holds. Isn't it sad that that talent is being used to email lawyers about legal issues and not to make music? Even being an independent artist is no guarantee to keeping your rights - if you license your music to someone and they continue to use it after the license ends you would be in exactly the same position that Fripp finds himself.

And the solution? Well, to start with, how about we live in a world that everyone gets along and treats each other fairly and with respect. Since this is unlikely to happen, how about a world where people understand the concept of fair exchange. Does a professional athlete deserve to make a million dollars a year? If he is selling five million worth of tickets for the owner, then maybe he does. If a CEO is earning fifty million running a company that is two billion in debt does he deserve his money? Does a musician deserve to make money from their music? If they are making money for someone else, then certainly a fair share should go to them.

I do understand the need for people who make investments in artists to see some return for what they put in - it's only fair. Do they need 95% of it? I don't think so. Sadly, the only way to keep the majority of the money in the artist hands is to have them fund and distribute their own work. I'm as well off selling 100 cd's for $5 each if I get to keep all the money rather that getting 5% of a thousand at $10. I would rather have a thousand fans, though - and that's what the record companies and distributors give you access to. Again, is this worth 95% of the money?

The consumer enters into this as well. Is it fair to charge $20 for a cd when you could sell it for $10 and maybe sell twice as many? Or have it at a price that people don't feel ripped off and resort to p2p sites?

Fair Exchange!! Unfortunately, it costs money to make music - shouldn't everyone receive fair compensation for their work? Whether you are the musician, the engineer, the graphic artist, the financier or the consumer, we should all get what we deserve. It's a big pie, after all. Everyone deserves their bit.

catfishman.

Fripp's Diary : http://www.dgmlive.com/search_diaries.htm?diarist=3