View Single Post
Old 12-15-2018, 11:25 AM   #44
darryl
Wizard
darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
darryl's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,108
Karma: 60231510
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura H2O, Kindle Oasis, Huwei Ascend Mate 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
Certainly that's an idea that I could support, though you do run into the issue of licensing which is where the big money is for the major properties like Harry Potter and LOTR. I still think that if you could figure out a way to carve out an exception for the major money making properties, then politically it would be quite viable to implement such a scheme, though perhaps going with the old US standard of 27 years rather than 10 years.
Interesting and intelligent comments. It would certainly be feasible to carve out at least most major properties by reference to the amount of revenue during the initial period. Do you see any benefit to doing this other than to make it politically possible. Leaving the rights holders there big money makers in return for their acquiescence. This alone would be quite adequate justification on the basis that it would still be a very significant improvement on the existing situation.

Also, any particular reason for 27 years? My suggestion of 10 was based on my understanding that most books have made virtually all of the revenue they are going to make well within the first 5 years, though on reflection this may no longer be true now books need never go "out of print".
darryl is offline   Reply With Quote