View Single Post
Old 07-22-2009, 10:53 PM   #117
HansTWN
Wizard
HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HansTWN ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,538
Karma: 264065402
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Taiwan
Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahi View Post
Forgive me, Hans, but this seems plainly wrong to me.

Consider how the creative professions traditionally supported themselves throughout most of history, and it is actually the last 100 or so years that suddenly look like an aberration, not the increasingly prevalent attitude that the costless reproduction of creative works ought not be a guarantee of livelihood to their authors, and much less to their publishers.
- Ahi
How creative professions supported themselves throughout history? Well usually through grants from kings and nobles, or through orders for specific works. Such as portraits or statues of these aristocrats. And that, of course, meant that such works were not available to the public. Music was not recordable at all. It is only during the past 2 centuries, that many people have learned to read, and through the industrial revolution that many people have the means and access to most creative works. That subscription deal you mention was very innovative yes, and we sure need innovative models now.

I just think it is wrong to distinguish -- a sculpture makes a statue, therefore he gets paid. A composer or an author makes something that can be easily copied, therefore he does not. Even though a good book can be enjoyed by millions, few have the opportunity to see a sculpture in person and a picture of it is not the same. We are shooting ourselves in the foot here. Who will write books for us to read in the future? Many people would write for fun, nobody would be able to spend a lot of time on it or go hungry.

For the Amazon model an author gets 35% not 3%. Actually not so bad, since it gives you instant access to millions of eyeballs. Honestly, if I was an author I would be happy that such an opportunity is available. And once a writer has achieved some notoriety he can switch. A simple business decision, better to sell 1000 books and get 35% than 5 books and get 90%. You pay Amazon for the shelf space.

As for publishers, I do think they will go the way of the horse buggy. It will just be authors and book sellers. Perhaps you can find a business model as a consultant to aspiring authors.

Last edited by HansTWN; 07-22-2009 at 11:07 PM.
HansTWN is offline   Reply With Quote