Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
Copyright for literature has a purpose that would not be well served by stopping it at a person's death. That purpose is to provide incentive to artists - and after death, their estates - to make their work available.
|
Makes no sense to me. With a paper book, the publisher has more reason to keep in print when royalty payments no longer need to be made. With an eBook, the main cost of keeping the book available, after the author's death, might not be the tiny royalties, but figuring out who is currently supposed to be getting the royalties.* When copyright expires, the publisher has no reason to withdraw the eBook.
I've tired and, so far, failed to find historical documentation of the rationale for Life + 50, adopted at the Berne Convention in 1886. My guess is that it was to provide for the (usually male) author's widow, at a time when there were no old age pension schemes. I have no evidence for it, but it does make more sense than thinking the existence of an estate would keep an unprofitable book in print.
Quote:
|
Publishers would start looking at an author's age and health before accepting works (they invest thousands to publish a book).
|
This is a reasonable speculation and a reason why, if I was the world's dictator, copyright would be for a fixed number of years.
The main point remains that eBooks for well-reviewed early and mid-twentieth century works are more more available for those out of copyright than those in-copyright.
____________________
* Or actual royalties might be zero, as many (most) books never earn back their advance. However, there is a record-keeping cost to knowing if the book has yet earned back the advance! If the sales of a book are miniscule, this by itself could render it unprofitable.