[petrucci]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Writing as a profession shows no signs of being in danger. More people are making a living writing today than have ever done so in the past.

I believe that writing as a profession is very much in danger. The example from the newspaper industry certainly suggests this. It would be a shame if the only people who can afford to write are the very wealth. This would set back hundreds of years of advances in society.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

You are proposing that readers are forced to subsidize the costs of books they don't want to read--and authors may not want to charge for.

No, I am not proposing that readers are forced to pay for books that they do not want.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

You're also being exceedingly unclear about where that money would go, if there's no author available. A hundred years from now, who'd have the right to set the minimum price and collect royalties for the last of the Sherlock Holmes stories? Two hundred years from now, who'd own the rights to the Beatles' music?

I would assume that the author appoints an heir. If this is not the case, most governments have laws pertaining to unclaimed assets.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Where's this shortage of new materials you're worried about so much that you'd like to create drastic changes to world economics? (Mandatory fees--for anything--is a drastic change. Who decides how much is enough? Who regulates that the fees are being charged?)

I am worried that people will not be able to earn a living writing fiction. I suspect that lack of professional writers will reduce the amount and quality of writing. I think that this is reason to produce a drastic change in economics. Such changes have been enacted to control the prices of other goods.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

"Someone who is very poor" includes children. Wouldn't want them having access to free reading materials, of course. It also includes parents with several children; wouldn't want them getting free ebooks or news either.

As I stated the poor will not go without books. There are public libraries, and other charities that offer books to the poor.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Obviously, anyone who's got time to read can afford "a" $6 paperback. The issue with affordable books for the poor is whether they can afford reading as a leisure and educational activity on a regular basis... or should they just be getting their new ideas from television?

Certainly there are more books in a public library than any of us have time to read. I do not believe that there is a shortage of books for the poor. Are we supposed to pay the poor so that they have time to read?

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

We finally have a way to broadcast text as cheaply as sound has been sent to people's homes for decades, and you want to remove it? You want to require us to pay for materials that are currently being offered for free, in order to support the careers of authors who can't compete in an open marketplace?

I am not suggesting removing the distribution channel. I do believe that authors should be paid for their work. It is possible that the cost of the book could be advertiser supported, and thus the consumer could think that it is free.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

How would you propose to make it mandatory to charge for writing? How much would authors be required to charge for what kinds of works?
...
Down to basics: How much do you think should be the minimum price for an ebook? (If you think different lengths or genres or something else should have different minimum prices, what would those be?) And who'll be managing that payment (and taking a cut)--Amazon? Paypal? Dwolla? Something else?

A government could create laws that make it mandatory to charge for works of fiction, and other forms of writing that are intended as entertainment. This may seem unreasonable and overreaching. However, governments have all sorts of restrictions on entertainment. They also have many restrictions on commerce to maintain a functional economic system. Although I do not prefer such political methods, I see the coming need for government intervention else the profession of writing will be in jeopardy. Given the gravity of the restrictions it is certainly worth waiting until there is concrete evidence of the decline in the profession.

It would be the goal that the price of books be such that authors are able to make a living from writing. Thus, different types of works would likely have different prices. The exact minimum price could be set through a consideration of the profits from similar books in the past. I must admit that all of this is rather much more complicated and authoritarian than I prefer. However, I do not see another method that preserves writing as a profession.