Quote:
Originally Posted by Format C:
I do.
If I die my wife won't get a penny other than what I have saved in my lifetime (she earns more than I do, and she won't even have my pension).
So, or every other worker gets the same treatment, or Gershwin loses his one.
If authors were paid for their actual work, like carpenters are, that's not a problem at all.
The per-copy-sold model is the worst I can imagine.
Using your same analogy: is it fair that a Shakira is paid 1000 times a Ludovico Einaudi? Is "Progress" to have tons of Harry Potter wannabes because they sell much better than a new "ulysses"?
That kind of "financial incentive" promotes trash much more than Art!
Come on! A photo poster of a couple of big tits sells more copies than Bresson's Station!
I think writers have to be paid like carpenters. A minimum hourly wage, and a little bonus if they produce a masterwork.
And never more than 100 times the world's average income (the escess amount coming from hardcopy sales, movie rights, etc.. is used to pay other writers minimum...)
If you want to be rich, establish your Standard Oil and be happy.
 |
I think you might be insane.