Quote:
Originally Posted by Belfaborac
I really don't think that line of reasoning has much merit. The few authors I know write because they want to communicate something or has stories banging on the inside of their skulls, desperately wanting out. I'm sure there are people writing only to make money, but I'm equally sure those are the people whose books I've never managed to finish reading, or will never bother picking up.
To suggest (if that was what you intended) that J. D. Salinger, or any other great author, would not have written x, y or z if copyright had ended on their deathbed and they wouldn't be able to monetise their art, is both ludicrous and somewhat insulting in my opinion.
|
I specifically mentioned J. D. Salinger because it is generally acknowledged that even though he only published 4 books in his lifetime (and none in the last 50 years of his life), that he wrote quite a few more since the publication of his last book. He was able to not publish because of the royalties he made on his novels (particularly Catcher in the Rye). So, in his case, it may not have stopped him writing, but it did stop him publishing. Now most of these books will probably be published, but who knows if some were lost in the intervening decades. I.e., this specific line of argument is against the current life + term we currently have in favor of a shorter fixed period.
That being said, lets say copyright ends at death. It is generally agreed that Salinger wrote at least 15 novels in the last 50 years. If his family can't profit from those novels, what motivation do they have to publish them? Likewise, if a publisher can't have exclusive rights to them, it lowers their incentive to actually publish the novels.
However, the other argument was that money provides an incentive for writers to write. Yes some writers will write regardless of whether or not their books will make money, but many authors do write exactly because of the money it provides them and some of them are quite good. Why do you think that Charles Dickens cared so much about the fact that his works were not copyrighted in the United States? Why do you think Sir Arthur Conan Doyle continued to write Sherlock Holmes stories long after he grew to despise the character (Though I will grant that his later Holmes stories are not up to the same standard as the first ones). Most authors want to make money from their work; it may not be their primary goal, but it is an important one.
--
Bill