View Single Post
Old 10-01-2009, 11:16 AM   #5
Moxie Mezcal
Human Fly
Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.Moxie Mezcal once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.
 
Moxie Mezcal's Avatar
 
Posts: 32
Karma: 1500
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Jose, California
Device: iPad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe View Post
So I thought it would be interesting to get all those releasing their work here, or releasing elsewhere, to comment on what copyright schemes they use and why.

Is your choice of copyright picked because you fear you might lose money? What is your motivation behind your releases? Do you expect to be or are you chasing a traditional publishing route? Where do you stand on the downloading-is-hurting-authors debate (lets forget for the moment the definition of the word 'theft')? What do you think will happen to the publishing industry in the long run?
Well I already weighed in over on that other thread, but I'll chime in here too, mostly because I obviously love to hear the sound of my own voice (or sound of my own typing, as the case may be). I use the same CC license that Moejoe does, BY-NC-SA. However, this is really only a suggestion, since I have no intention of suing, stalking, or tar-and-feathering anyone who violates it. To me, the purpose of the CC license is first and foremost to let people know that it's okay to steal, share, remix, etc my stuff.

Attribution (BY) because I'm an egomaniac and I want to get the credit. Share Alike (SA) mostly because I think CC licenses are really cool and want to encourage other artists to adopt them (but honestly, if someone did a remix or derivative of my work, I would be thrilled to pieces, regardless of whether they SA). Noncommercial (NC) because I want as many people to have access of my stuff as possible & I see charging $$$ as working against that goal.

The reason I started publishing my stuff online was: I wanted other people to read & enjoy it. I know my stuff isn't for everyone, but if I can get as many people as possible to read it, then it increases my chances of connecting with the people who'll really dig what I'm doing.

Do I expect to ever go down the "traditional publishing route"? Clearly not (I mean, have you read my stuff? seriously)... however, as I alluded to in the other thread, I wouldn't object to someone else making money off my work per se. I prefer NC to make the work available to as many people as possible, but if you want to distribute my work & the only way you're willing to do so is to charge for it, then go nuts. Here's an example: Amazon won't list an e-book unless you charge a minimum of $0.99, so Sweet Dream, Silver Screen is listed for $0.99.

Another example - I've given "print" versions of my stories (read: "cheap photocopies") to local stores that sell zines. I basically say: "I'm giving this stuff away for free. If you want to charge for it, fine. If you can somehow convince someone - through cunning, chicanery, or coercion - to fork over a buck or two for this, then you earned it."

The example that came up in the other thread was "what if Disney made a movie based on your work, made a boatload of money off it and didn't give you a cut - would you be okay with that?" To which, I responded with an unequivocal "yes"! By the way, Bob Iger still hasn't called me (we can make this happen, Bob).

The one thing I will never do is sell the rights to the point where I can no longer do as I please with my own work. If some hypothetical publisher (doubtless a hopeless masochist) decided there was a buck or two to be made off my work (especially given my aversion to collecting royalties), it'd have to be done in such a way that I retained the right to give away free e-books on my website (I'll spare you the suspense - that publisher does not and probably will never exist).

So, long-story-short time:
Am I pursuing a traditional-publishing-whatever? Clearly not.
Do I think filesharing is "hurting" authors? Nope.
Do I pick a copyright out of fear of losing money? Nope.
Am I a shameless attention-whore? Hells yeah.
Moxie Mezcal is offline   Reply With Quote