Lessig's "Free Culture?"

In response to a particular section of this: (http://www.firasd.org/scrapbook/books/lessig/freeculture.txt).

I have taken a music/record label copyright class before, so this is not the first time I've heard of some stupid copyright laws. I have no problem with inventions and other commercial goods being copyrighted. However, when it comes to music, movies, and other media along the same lines - this is where I start to get a bit up-in-arms. Do you know why? Because these things are supposed to be "art." Art shouldn't anything to do with big corporations, capitalism, or even money for that matter. If you are in the "art" field in order to make money - you're in it for the wrong reason. Art is about feeling, emotion, not being a millionaire. Familiar with the term "starving artist?" If your occupation is "art," you should be more than happy to have someone interested in your work, period. If your work is good and you reach the right audience, you'll be able to be successful. I want to work in the music industry, but I just cannot take the fact that it has turned into a greedy, overblown, fascist machine run by slick, corporate money-grubbing assholes that don't care about anything other than making money - how about making good music? This is exactly why I don't listen to "pop" music - it has no soul, it's all image and glam, and money. Of course, I agree with Lessig in regards to the idea that the illegality of copyright circumvention devices is ludicrous. They can be used to many good ends - for example especially my personal wish/hope that they could be used to put big movie and record companies out of business and put the personal creativity back into the hands of the people for the first time in many, many years and quit shoveling their mindless corporate drivel down our collective throats. In the case of the "Aibo" dog, I not necessarily surprised as much as I am as astounded that this even happened. Just imagine buying a computer, changing the background and some other trivial things that merely "personalize" it and then showing a friend how to do it. Well, looks like in the future any form of individualism and personalization is considered a copyright infringement - looks brighter already... Furthermore, the only people who seem to give a damn about this are Mr. Rogers (who is now deceased!) and the poor people who are being sued by the RIAA. Nobody is talking about this, why? If you want to call yourself an "artist" you need to be more concerned with quality rather the price tag. Honestly, I just don't get it - I'm an artist myself and I don't ask for a penny - my music is available for free download on the internet and I'm proud of that - I want it to go as far as it can - and to as many people as possible and they don't need to be rich.