MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Random House being sued for not paying royalties

TechniSol · 04-25-2015, 01:08 AM

I'm not in the mood for BS, legal or otherwise, at the moment.

I personally think it reprehensible that RH and it's author should have originally made any arrangement not based on the notion of the blood money(let's call a shovel a shovel) going to a charity directly beneficial to the descendants of the people harmed by the actions of the original author and the regime he represented or better yet a charity devoted to preventing such abuses of power worldwide ala Amnesty International, etc. This whole notion of reconsidering paying for something they originally agreed to, now on moral grounds, merely stinks of being self serving and, if possible, makes them look even worse.

I hope the judge or ruling body, etc. will find a way to employ common sense within the boundaries of the law and force the redirection of the funds to a beneficial purpose -failing that, I hope they force RH to pay and shame the planned recipients into doing the same, applying it to a humanitarian purpose.

A large part of me feels this should be more about what is right than what is "legal". We need to grow past petty loopholes and find a way to do the right things without having to rely on the letter of the law to force us into it. Yes, we need laws, but they should be there only when we can find no better resolution. If people tried harder to do the right thing to begin with we'd probably need far less laws.

I realize many will label this thinking hopelessly naive, but they will probably also be the ones profiting the most from obfuscation through legal means...

04-25-2015, 01:08 AM	#63
TechniSol GranPohbah-Fezzes r cool! Posts: 1,056 Karma: 3151024 Join Date: Jul 2010 Device: Nook STRs, Kobo Touch, Kobo Glo	I'm not in the mood for BS, legal or otherwise, at the moment. I personally think it reprehensible that RH and it's author should have originally made any arrangement not based on the notion of the blood money(let's call a shovel a shovel) going to a charity directly beneficial to the descendants of the people harmed by the actions of the original author and the regime he represented or better yet a charity devoted to preventing such abuses of power worldwide ala Amnesty International, etc. This whole notion of reconsidering paying for something they originally agreed to, now on moral grounds, merely stinks of being self serving and, if possible, makes them look even worse. I hope the judge or ruling body, etc. will find a way to employ common sense within the boundaries of the law and force the redirection of the funds to a beneficial purpose -failing that, I hope they force RH to pay and shame the planned recipients into doing the same, applying it to a humanitarian purpose. A large part of me feels this should be more about what is right than what is "legal". We need to grow past petty loopholes and find a way to do the right things without having to rely on the letter of the law to force us into it. Yes, we need laws, but they should be there only when we can find no better resolution. If people tried harder to do the right thing to begin with we'd probably need far less laws. I realize many will label this thinking hopelessly naive, but they will probably also be the ones profiting the most from obfuscation through legal means...