Quote:
Originally Posted by petrucci
I am not anti competition. I am opposed to unfair competition. This has become a greater concern now, as a digital copy of an out of copyright book can cost next to nothing. In such a circumstance it is not on a level playing field with new books whose authors are still trying to make a living.
|
There is nothing "unfair" about the public domain. What you are proposing is the artificial elimination of competition.
There are public domain books that are commonly read, and there are public domain books that aren't commonly read. The ones that are commonly read are going to be read whether or not copyright is made eternal. People are going to read Jane Austen or Dickens whether or not they are under copyright. If they were under copyright, the only difference would be that the reader would have less disposable money in their pockets than they would if these books were public domain.
If Jane Austen and Dickens were somehow suppressed, this would NOT mean more sales for authors on the fringe. The people who read classics would simply read more of the better current authors, rather than reading books of marginal quality.
If you were correct, then book sales would be collapsing as e-reader owners obtained nothing but public domain works. But that isn't the case. E-reader owners do read some public domain books, but also read a whole lot of new books.