embedding disabled by request

... is totally understandable

i heard something on the radio today

and i wanted to be able to play it, to you, like the guy on the radio did

and the closest thing that comes to that is blogging with youtube embeds

but i totally understand why an artist would not want that to happen.

i can understand it less if i was a filmmaker, but i suppose filmmaking credits are as complex as they are long

someone different does different things, so who owns the total result?

rights.

the right to reprint, or sell copies of something.

it's a big part of the creative industries, but isn't that the problem?

isn't the mistaken nuptuals between creativity and trade one of the evils besetting the world? or is it a method for people who make things that are consumed as copies by virtue of their method of distribution to make some money off each sale.

business prefers large volumes of sales.

art is usually a one-off, and it's true. even a great recording is just one possible version of a work. like each painting of a certain design.

we're pretty precious about art, don't you think?

some art is truly precious though...

like brian eno, but he seems to really *get* digital distribution

that iphone thing is sweet

...