View Single Post
Old 10-24-2017, 08:39 PM   #67
Cinisajoy
Just a Yellow Smiley.
Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Cinisajoy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Cinisajoy's Avatar
 
Posts: 19,162
Karma: 83811071
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Texas
Device: K4, K5, fire, kobo, galaxy
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherCat View Post
She is not paying $20/yr to keep her property. Her property is the intellectual work. The copyright is not property, it is a legislated right of advantage granted to her by "the many" (to borrow Hitch's terminology) through their elected (or otherwise, if not a democracy) representatives.

In the wider world it is usual that the granters of rights, of whatever sort, have some rights on their side of the agreement too and both the granter and the receiver of the right usually overtly acknowledge and respect that. As houses have been mentioned I will use those as one example. I may grant a right to a tenant to live unmolested in my house but I have the right that the house be protected by the tenant.

However, it seems to me that most authors do not see the world that way at all, and feel no responsibility whatsoever to the granters ("the many") of the right. Hence, perhaps, the concept of their regarding copyright as their own "property". In fact I find it very hard to think of one thing that authors widely recognize as being a right of "the many" and posts in this thread demonstrate the grasping and exaggerated sense of worth many authors have for themselves and their work. That said, I do know of copyright holders of important works who, after some years, have made their work downloadable free in eBook form for individual use.

Authors would, of course, come to a realization if "the many", through their elected representatives, decided to remove all copyright protection until the rights holders conceded that other people have rights too. What the rights of "the many" might be are a matter of opinion, but one might be the right to receive a payment as shalym has suggested. Whether the payment is regarded as a contribution to "the many" for their granting of the right (payment being into the Government's consolidated fund), or, for example, as a disincentive to sit on a previously published but no longer printed work does not matter.

One may not agree with that specific suggestion in which case one has to either suggest alternatives, such as shorter term of copyright, or at least agree that there should be some rights of "the many". Else one has to take the stand that "the many" who granted the right to authors in the first place have no rights at all.
Hmmm. Let's see I decide to write the ultimate guide to life.
Did the many tell me to write it? Now if I decide to publish it, I am guaranteed the right that no one else will copy it for profit for my entire life and probably almost the entire life of my grandson. If I want to actually protect this right, I do need to give our government $60.
Why would I need to pay more if I suddenly decide to pull it off the shelf?
Do you or Ralph or Shari have any rights to profit off of my hard work?
Maybe, I pulled it because the many were not buying it. Maybe I pulled it for financial reasons.
Now if for some reason in 100 years or so, Shari's descendants decide the advice is still relevant than they are more than welcome to it.
But as long as me or my descendants have the right to decide than the many don't have the right to profit off my work.

You want authors to make their works available no matter what, well then would you do your job for no pay?

You don't think authors should get paid for their work after a certain time. Would you work 40 hours a week but only get paid for 30? Same difference.
Cinisajoy is offline   Reply With Quote