Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Old Neon
Some writers, Ralph Ellison, for example, only publish one major work, in Ellison’s case, Invisible Man, while alive. I see no reason why he should not have been allowed to receive proceeds from its sale at least until the day he died.
In 1870, 42 years was a lifetime.
|
So, less prolific writers should get more protections for their works? I'm not seeing the logic here. Authors who only produce one work--no matter how great--don't deserve any income than those who produce hundreds of works.
And in 1870, 42 years was not "a lifetime." Lower "average ages" of earlier times were based on high infant mortality; those who lived to see 20, had a very good chance of living to see 65. 85 was unusual, but not remarkable. People didn't live particularly less than they do now; they were just more prone of dying of disease when young or accidents when old.