Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Copyright (as it is currently used in the US), is best thought of a price supports for artists. Sorta like the old "soil banking" for farmers (I.e. paying a farmer not to farm so prices will stay higher for those farmer who do farm their land). It keeps the old works off the shelves, competing with the new art.
That may not have been the intention, but that is the use today. An enormous amount of art was made in the US prior to 1976. The golden age of Hollywood, the golden age of Radio shows, painters and illustrators like Maxfield Parrish, et. al., the maturation of the pulps to literature, like the golden age of detective fiction, science fiction, ect., Jazz and Big Band music, and on, and on...
Nobody complained that they couldn't create art because copyright was too short, instead, they created and made (or lost) money. Artforms rose and fell, but not because copyright was too short.
But now, under the old rules, much of that would have fallen into the Public Domain. And the P.D. doesn't cost anything. This leads to a two-fold situation.
#1. If P.D. stuff is free, why should somebody pay for the latest? Why not be cheap and get old (but new to you) art? Of course, not everybody will take that attitude, but for every one that does, that's one less sale of current material.
#2. If enough people actually wants that old stuff, the extended copyright holders can re-issue it (if they bother to choose to) for a profit. actually a bigger profit that new stuff, because, for the most part, the upfront expenses have already been paid. Nobody wants to look at this way but by selling it as near or at new retail price, the old works don't undercut the current art pricing.
BearMountain - how much worse off, as a reader, to have all the US works before Jan 1 1955 in the Public Domain? As a writer, yes, because of the tremendous amount of low cost competition, but as a reader? I don't see the problem.
If you say this will cause a drop in new art creation, the market for people who want new, will always be there. What you will lose is the market of those who are forced to pay for old at the same rate as new, and who therefore may opt for new, instead. And frankly, the world doesn't owe you that market...
|
So assuming that books from back then are suddenly cheaper, the COST to me as a reader is that any time you push prices down on goods, it will push prices down on current goods (or could.) That sounds great to me as a reader until my favorite writers stop writing. Those writers writing today may not be inclined to continue a series (even if they want to, their publisher may say, sorry, not enough sales.) I've already had multiple series cancelled that I was enjoying and at least one writer who hasn't written in years. It's just not a viable career for many a writer.
I've already seen some of this "lack of buying" due to all the freebies. I'm not saying the world owes me any market. I put out a product. I put a price on it. I think it's a fair price and because I don't put DRM on it, I have to trust the reader to be honest--and either pay it because they want the book or pass on it because it isn't worth the few bucks to them. If enough people decide it isn't worth a few bucks, then I'll eventually move on to something else. I don't think it's a terrible thing to have copyright protection that keeps (or may keep) some other person from copying characters/phrases from my novels, pasting the entire thing into a new cover and selling it, etc.
I view copyright as: If you don't want to pay for it, don't. But I don't think copyright HURTS any reader because there are multiple ways to obtain materials for reasonable costs that include a price tag of zero. I think lack of copyright or too short of a copyright could actually hurt writers and readers in the long run.
If current readers want the convenience of the latest and greatest technology (ebooks) I don't see any reason the owners shouldn't be protected and make a buck or two. If readers don't want to pay for it, don't. And some older books? Get them the old fashioned way by buying used or whatever other legal means is available.
I'm not for price-gouging, but no one is going to produce other goods for me for free and I really don't think copyright is harmful to readers because there are multiple ways to get the good for a reasonable price.
In the old days it was sometimes impossible to find a book. With the internet, so much more is available. It may not be in the form I want or convenient, but generally speaking I can find it.