Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe
Your analogy is irrelevant. The process of writing is unseen, has an unkown time frame, and is subjectively enjoyed by the creator. It is also, for a vast majority, done on-spec without a contract or any fixed hours. It has very little parallel with an employee/employer xhours = xpay job.
And in any case your analogy is almost to a tea what the publishing companies do. They offer advances on sales that they think will happen... doesn't matter how many hours you put into the creation of the work, if they deem it to be worth only $5 then they will only pay you an advance that they can then make some profit from. So they'll pay you $2
Find another analogy that actually makes sense and I'll argue against it.
|
It wasn't really an analogy actually. I was merely pointing out the reverse side of the logic that says "I wont pay you based on your effort or time, I'll pay you whatever I want based on whatever I think gives me the best outcome".
It's great to use that logic when it benefits us but it's a rare individual indeed who uses that logic when it comes to what others should pay them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moejoe
Actually I did argue in earlier posts that I thought payment after enjoyment was the best method (or was that in another thread?). In any case I don't think set prices reflect the digital age, especially in the face of zero-cost and infinite reproduction. Set prices make little sense to a digital audience. Now, paying after you've enjoyed something, that might work. So yeah, reading does have value. Although thats up to the individual to decide, not the company.
|
And do you really see the individual in this world saying "hey that was my favourite book of all time so I'm going to pay $100 it was just so darn good"??
What you are arguing is that the audience should have sole rights to determine the valuation of the work. Furthermore, you argue the audience should have sole rights to determine valuation after they have been able to enjoy the work obligation free!
You are not aruging "Creators and audience first" at all. You are arguing audience first, last and only.
Cheers,
PKFFW