Quote:
Originally Posted by dmaul1114
Again, I'm talking about successful authors who have good contracts--but long-term ones etc.
If they're locked into a % of sales (even a good %) is it fair for them to see less money because people feel e-books should cost significantly less than the print versions.
|
Yes it is fair. It is also fair if that lower price sells more books and they see more money. They are selling an entertainment commodity.
I have been reading some of Eric Flint's writings on copyright, and I think he has it pretty well understood (although I do differ on some points with his length assessments). Copyright is a license for the author to have a temporary monopoly for the sole purpose of enhancing society as a whole (ie the work becomes public domain). This trade off is meant to be temporary, however lobbying has stolen a lot of work from the people. What it boils down to is a trade off, when work is created it belongs to society as a whole, not the author, however the public good is best served by people creating works that the society may take advantage of. So, the artificial concept of copyright grants a license to the creator so they can make money of the creation before the public has full use/control.
Now, we have mega corporations stealing this content from us, bribing our elected official to make a perpetual copyright.
Now back to the point, these established authors decided to gamble on futures in this market. They signed away their rights to future production to a publishing house, who now gets those rights. They were gambling on prices remaining stable, and it appears they may have lost that gamble. Is it fair, sure it is. What they now need to work on is getting a larger population to buy this work, so they can maintain as much or more money.
As an example, a futures trader makes a bet when oil is at $150/bbl that prices will go up, so he buys future barrels at $150 dollars. Then the prices crash to $80/bbl. Is that fair? Yes, he knew when he signed the contract that is what he is signing on for.
So the only way an author would make less money for having the book price drop while costs go down, they signed a poor contract & the lower price doesn't increase sales. The first is their fault, and the second is their fault if they didn't keep some distribution control (mandates against DRM or other things that would make consumers rebel against them). Remember, they are the ones granted the monopoly license, they are the only ones that can trade that away.
--Carl