Should writers give up on getting paid for their writing?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Giving work away for free, in return for some notoriety and an expectation of paid work in the future, is one of the oldest methods known of beginning and growing a business. Nothing wrong with it at all. Naturally, established businesses hate to see new businesses do it, because it shifts the commercial balance and undercuts the established business.

Ellison thinks of himself, and all GOOD writers, as "Arr-teests," to be lauded by the unwashed masses and showered with gold for their efforts. The rest (like me, who don't have his extensive credentials) are considered by him to be hacks, who should be ridden out of town on a rail for performing on the street (and taking income that should have gone to him).

I'd remind him that he's written for television. Here's a ladder... climb down.

You are being too kind and forgiving by providing a ladder, let him figure it out himself.

[carld]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

Certainly, he's free to rant until he's red in the face. He can scream all he wants. No one said that he didn't. It doesn't mean his position is reasonable. He's outraged that someone could call him and ask him to allow his interview to be used for free. Fine, it's work, he can do with it as he pleases. But when he rages about people who give away their work without payment, he's not doing anything different from those who call him and ask him to give away his work for free.

I think his main point, that writers should be paid for the work they do, is completely reasonable.

[StephenM]

Cory Doctorow makes his books available for free at craphound.com. He has stated that since he has started to do this, he has sold more print books. It also likely gets him more speaking engagements. Therefore, it can be shown that giving away ebooks for free can actually increase your income. It is a purely anecdotal example, but I think it makes an interesting point.

[lucasfernan89]

People will continue to pay for books, but authors making money? Ha. There's a lot of competition out there. It's not a field to enter with the idea of hitting it rich.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by lucasfernan89

People will continue to pay for books, but authors making money? Ha. There's a lot of competition out there. It's not a field to enter with the idea of hitting it rich.

There are certainly easier ways to make money.

[petrucci]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

What is reasonable about his opinion that people who give their work away for free are "as*holes"? What's the alternative, forcing people to charge for their work? If someone wants to give something away, shouldn't they be able to? He rails against amateurs, but the amateurs have every bit as much right to write and to distribute their work on their terms as he does.

I have vacillated on this issue in the past. Certainly it seems reasonable for someone to be free to give away their work. On the other side of the coin, a very rich person could give away their work and put a working class person out of a job. I fear the potential for the mega rich to crush industries, as they have the capitol to do so. For those who think that such things do not happen research Government subsidised crops in the US and their effect on agriculture in developing countries.

I think that it is reasonable for the price of items to reflect the time that people spend on them.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by petrucci

I have vacillated on this issue in the past. Certainly it seems reasonable for someone to be free to give away their work. On the other side of the coin, a very rich person could give away their work and put a working class person out of a job. I fear the potential for the mega rich to crush industries, as they have the capitol to do so. For those who think that such things do not happen research Government subsidised crops in the US and their effect on agriculture in developing countries.

I think that it is reasonable for the price of items to reflect the time that people spend on them.

If it is yours, do as you wish. If you want to give it away for free, that's your business. Government subsidized crops don't have anything to do with what people charge for their books.

It's not reasonable for the price to reflect the time that people spend on them. Demand is what sets the price. Should a ticket to a three hour movie cost twice as much as a ticket to a 90 minute movie? Should a book that I love that takes me only a day to read cost less than a book that I endure after slogging through it for a week?