This idea of Metallica or some rock n’ roll singer being rich, that’s not necessarily going to happen anymore. Because, as we enter into a new age, maybe art will be free. Maybe the students are right. They should be able to download music and movies. I’m going to be shot for saying this. But who said art has to cost money? And therefore, who says artists have to make money?

In the old days, 200 years ago, if you were a composer, the only way you could make money was to travel with the orchestra and be the conductor, because then you’d be paid as a musician. There was no recording. There were no record royalties. So I would say, “Try to disconnect the idea of cinema with the idea of making a living and money.” Because there are ways around it.

Francis Ford Coppola: On Risk, Money, Craft & Collaboration, 2011?

https://web.archive.org/web/20110125035605/http://the99percent.com/articles/6973/Francis-Ford-Coppola-On-Risk-Money-Craft-Collaboration

via @pluralistic

Francis Ford Coppola: On Risk, Money, Craft & Collaboration

<div>Legendary film director Francis Ford Coppola talks about how he self-finances all his films, why the artist must never lie, and how true collaboration is like great sex.</div>

The 99% by Behance
@prinlu @pluralistic I like paying artists for their work and I like being paid for the art I produce or help to produce. Producing art is, unless you drink the AI coolaid, time-consuming to produce. If artists continue to expend that time, but are not paid, how then, can they live comfortably?

@JustinMac84 @prinlu @pluralistic I think it's worth to modify his take a bit. As an artist and producer myself, I can say that I am against artists becoming obscenely rich.

The democratisation of music is something I always loved to see, but let's make it possible for more artists to get paid that way, instead of the money going to the CEOs. More artists being paid fairly leads to a better music landscape, instead of everyone trying to please the algorithm with the same slop.