Quote:
Originally Posted by starrigger
You're not doing him any favors by suggesting that he just blatantly violate copyright law, lie to the vendor (if it's Amazon, Smashwords, etc.) about being the rights owner, and then wait to say, "Oh--sorry." The one thing that will certainly accomplish is to get him a reputation as a copyright pirate. Bad idea.
|
I'm not suggesting that he lie to anyone. In fact, I'm not suggesting that he do this.
I am suggesting, however, that if he wants to do this and he cannot find out who the copyright owners are, he might consider going ahead and letting them find him.
Yes, he may lose out on 100% of his revenue of a contested book, but that is part of the process of negotiation. The matter of legal fees is a part of doing business.
The premise is that these are old books that no one has an interest in. If his efforts flush out those who do have an interest in the book, so much the better.
The issue of Google's negotiations with the Authors' Guild (if that is the correct name) occurred to me, but I don't know enough about it to discuss it. The Authors' Guild reminds me of ASCAP. I remember a few years ago that ASCAP demanded payment from someone, and the response was...OK, send us a complete list of your songs, and we won't play them. ASCAP folded.
Perhaps the Authors' Guild is or will be an authoritative source of who owns the copyright. If so, excellent! That would eliminate a great deal of the hassle.
I disagree with the above comment that lots of heirs will be greedy and put a kibosh on Gannett's plans. My experience in real estate suggests that the heirs will be happy to receive fair compensation.