Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsunami
It always seems that artists are the only people that want and even expect to profit for a lifetime from any work done. A writer writes one book, a singer writes one song, and so on. These can be sold millions of times, and the authors reap rewards their entire lives if the products stay popular.
|
If the work contiues to sell,
somebody will make money from it. Why should the publishers get to keep it all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsunami
I for one, who writes computer software (which is also creating / writing stuff), has to keep working and working, as in a matter of 1-3 years, nobody will want the current program, or current website system anymore. Maybe it won't even work on a new system. It will need to be updated or even replaced.
|
I hate to tell you this, but most creative works have a shelf life measured in weeks, or months at most, not years like your software. (Plus, you're doing work for hire, where most artists don't. That is a choice you make, that most artists don't. As is creating something that really can't last more than a few years in the market, rather than something that can, in theory, still have some appeal centuries from now.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katsunami
Work once, profit many times over. Only artists expect this, and they always whine when it doesn't work out that way. My father, who was a construction worker, never received any royalties for each time someone walks on a path he laid down or walks trhough a door he placed.
|
A new door or path isn't created each time someone walks down or through one.
There are qualitative differences between artistic work and the manufacture of goods.