Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterRage
Surely, if copyright infringement was actually "theft", according to the legal definition of "theft" then there would be some instance of someone, somewhere being convicted of "theft" for copyright infringement.
Calling it "theft" just to be inflammatory doesn't move us one step closer to finding any agreement, or even common ground.
|
I posted the legal definition of THEFT. I clearly went through the arguments immediately thereafter.
I'm not calling it theft to be inflammatory. I'm calling it theft because that's what it is, under numerous aspects of that legal definition. Calling it "infringement" is an attempt to decriminalize the thought process around the topic;
it's SPIN. It's obfuscatory prestidigitation. "Don't look at my right hand doing the theft, ladies and gentlemen; look at my left hand, which is "only" infringing, which I will then also
incorrectly tell you isn't a crime."
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterRage
But the question, at least in the case of OOP books, is whether or not you should have to pay for it. It's not black and white. I mean, we're on page 12 of this thread, it's clearly not black and white.
I remain unconvinced that this ever happens.
|
Are you seriously arguing that midlist OOP authors--the guys who are THRILLED to get $5,000 advances--are the authors who should be penalized the MOST by this? These are the books that someone is arguing you shouldn't HAVE to pay for?
Because those are the guys and women who are getting hosed. It's not the Dan Browns of the world getting stuffed; their books get printed and reprinted and reprinted yet again until you can buy 2nd-hand copies on Amazon for a penny. It's the midlisters of the world who are getting killed by this; the guys who sell
just enough to get another contract, but not enough to get a second printing. The guy whose next book contract is always "in review" in the publisher's committee because maybe he doesn't have quite enough sales; that he's always on the cusp. So THIS is the guy you want to penalize? The guy who spent a year of his life writing a book for which he was lucky to get Five Grand, and now won't get ongoing royalties (like they used to when the midlist got printed and reprinted for years, for libraries and such) because the midlist is dying? This is the guy whose OOP book--the one he can do nothing about, because the publisher still has the rights, but isn't printing it--THIS is the guy whose books you don't think you "should" have to pay for, and therefore tell the freaking publisher that a second printing IS warranted.
I told you it happened. Feel free to contact the publishers. They reprinted "Shakespeare's Christmas" in Harris' Lily Bard series due to 2nd-hand demand.
Don't believe me about what's going on with the midlist? Check with Holly Lisle, who's been a fantasy midlister for years. She's had a series killed off. It's OOP, through no fault of her own. Publisher still has the rights, though, so she can't digitize it and monetize it herself. Or how about Norman Spinrad? There are THOUSANDS--not hundreds, THOUSANDS of authors in this position, and THOSE are the authors you're talking about hurting, particularly in the fantasy and sci-fi markets.
Just so you know. John Grisham and Dan Brown and Stephenie Meyers aren't the authors getting gutted by this. It's the authors
who still have their dayjobs that are the ones that get hurt.
To respond to your second about Charlaine Harris: No, it was a publisher respond to demand before "True Blood" hit it big on HBO...it was in process for over a year, and much discussed. Prices for Shakespeare's Christmas had gone through the roof in 2nd-hand bookstores. Did people discover the Lily Bards through the Sookies? Yes, probably..but it was a book-specific demand.