i remember commies! they were always fun to have around, gave you somebody to kick the shit out of.
i remember the first time the clash came to seattle, it was on the heels of 'give 'em enough rope', and the seattle communist party decided to go check out the crowd and leaflet and parade around with banners in solidarity with the common punk, or something like that. the crowd beat them to a pulp.
pm - you don't seem to see the difference between product and service. advertising is a service, records are product. ad are not product unless they are sold as collectibles in after market. without the compettion for artist to get the advertising work, there are no collectibles to collect or sell. unless you consider the 'franklin mint' collectible.
do you people even read what i write? i'm defending the right of everyone to get work, the right to compete on a fair field. exclusivity denys the right of people to even have a shot at it. that is unfair. frank, you of all people should realize that you would never have had any career if you didn't get a shot at doing posters. when you sign an exclusive deal, it kills the market and wipes out growth.
just becaue somebody happens to benefit does not automatically make it better. such a position can be very damaging.
you never defined exclusive for me pm. i want to know when this sort of arrangement is ok and when it's not ok. your position is that it's ok whenever you benefit (becuase you live in a basement). i say, there is a limit on exclusivity, especially when it competes unfairly against others trying to survive in the same market. EXCLUSIVITY removes compettiton and thus negates the capitalist baseline of 'fair market'.
unless, of course, it benefits you personally. we always make exceptions for whiners, right?
no, and that doesn't make me a commie or a hypocrit. it just li'l ol me pointing out what a philosophical fraud you are.