View Single Post
Old 10-12-2010, 02:19 PM   #24
Lady Fitzgerald
Wizard
Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Lady Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,013
Karma: 251649
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tempe, AZ, USA, Earth
Device: JetBook Lite (away from home) + 1 spare, 32" TV (at home)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Russell View Post
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...
Since the OP would have violated copyright law, he may face criminal action as well as civil action. Even if only hit with a civil suit, the plaintiffs may not just settle for recovery of actual profits but also seek actual value (a value the paintiff will likely be able to set) and the resulting possible damages (depending on how good their lawyers are, anything can be trumped up) and the OP would also have legal expenses. The odds are the OP would be in the hole finanacially.

Deliberately breaking the law by not securing rights from copyright owners before publishing would be dishonest and poor business practice and ethics. Even though the task of running down the present copyright owners could be a royal pain, it would be the wisest course by far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Russell View Post
...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.
My experience with retail sales and people in general strongly suggests otherwise. I'm surprised your real estate experience suggests otherwise since articles I've read on pricing real estate, talking to real estate appraisers and real estate sales people I know, etc., all suggest most people have inflated opinions of the value of their property, usually due to misconceptions (market value vs. personal value) but sometimes also due to pure greed.

It's one thing when someone is inquiring about something you own and might want to sell outright or want rights to but let someone illegally encroach on someone's rights, and suddenly the perceived value skyrockets. An old clunker that was stolen suddenly becomes a classic collector's item once someone has destroyed it in an accident or it has been stolen. All too often, once someone has you over a barrel, they will try to take unfair advantage of you and, in the case of lawsuits, since you unlawfully created the situation, the plaintiffs will have the advantage.
Lady Fitzgerald is offline   Reply With Quote