Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitch
Shari:
With all due respect--and without pointing this person out--there's a person that frequents these forums, all the time, who could not POSSIBLY pay that, to retain some relative's rights. His/her living situation is such that literally, pennies count. That's an American, living with some physical issues with a spouse with an emotional/mental challenge. That's just ONE person, from these forums.
How many others do you think there are, that are like that, in the USA? A country where we had some horrible number of people, a %, on foodstamps, not that long ago?
I can, easily, afford $20/year. But not everyone can, and I don't make the mistake of thinking that it's a pittance to everyone.
Moreover, just on principle, no, I don't agree that the heirs and devisees of an author should be OBLIGATED to make the book available during its copyright period. If they want to, great. But why should they pay for it, just to HAVE it? That's what you're saying--to keep what they've inherited, even if it's not earning a dime, they have to pay for it. Sorry, but...again, that feels awfully cavalier about someone else's property--intellectual or otherwise. And bear in mind--if that copyright is construed to have value, those selfsame heirs/devisees may WELL have paid the infamous Inheritance Tax on it, as well. In fact, probably did--so, now, the author paid taxes on any advance and any royalties, while he was alive; his heirs will (possibly) pay Inheritance tax on that self-same already-taxed money that they inherit, and now they're going to pay a tax--er, fee--to keep the copyright that is, under your scenario, NOT earning them any money?
Man. That just feels egregious to me. And the "publishing police" I mentioned earlier--who's doing that? You said, if they don't make the book available, they have to pay a fee. Who enforces that? Who assesses and collects it? That would be some type of enforcement arm--the publishing police, whatever you call them. Whoever they may be. So, back to my question--I get pissed off, as an heir, and I print, and "publish" 5 copies, to my relatives. Does that get me off the Fee hook?
The logistics of it are truly mind-numbing to think about. The IRS isn't already intrusive enough into our lives?
Hitch
|
Once again, from the top -
Copyright is not property! It does not, nor ever have, followed the rules of property! I don't know how much more clear I can make this.
It is a right
granted by the government for a limited term. Not forever. Not for your descendants. It is granted to creators to encourage creation.
Dead people don't create!!!. Nobody makes you create. That's a choice, with rights and responsibilities, <and a time limit>. You know that going into the business. It's not magical power, it's just work and talent.
I'm a professional programmer. I have been for over 35 years. I get no royalties. I own no copyright from my professional work. What I did get was a paycheck, for services rendered. Right now I get paid very close to 6 figures a year for my skills. I also hold a few personal copyrights, because I was feeling brisk. they are effectively worthless. I could care less what happens to them.
If you want to play the copyright game, it's a free country. But the rules of the game are what they are. You got to work within them. And they shouldn't change after the fact, just to please you, while cheating somebody else.
Now, if despite everything I've said above, you expect copyright to be treated as property, then expect to get the bad side of property as well as the good side. And that means paying taxes on the property, and registering it with the government to be taxed. No register, no copyright. Just like a fallow piece of land. It produces no income, but it still get taxed (in most jurisdictions), and your ownership of the land must be registered to maintain your ownership! Your copyright can produce absolutely no income, but it would still be taxed. (How much would be determined by the government.)