A Modest Proposal - Eternal Copyright - Page 6

Belfaborac · 03-01-2012, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrscoach

Do you really think publishers would pay the heirs? Really? They would be like, "Sorry, it's out of copyright and public domain now. No soup for you."

If a contract was signed, then yes. There are, presumably, laws in the US, including contract law. If they don't want to pay, then they can hand the manuscript back and the family is free to approach someone else.

Belfaborac · 03-01-2012, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

It makes the contract meaningless.

Of course it doesn't.

anamardoll · 03-01-2012, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrscoach

Thanks for that tidbit. I wonder if it has ever been challenged? It seems to me if someone puts up with a writer during the creation and re-creation (editing) then they would get something automatically. LOL

Er, well, my husband doesn't "put up" with me for financial gain. Nor do I, him. We love each other. If we didn't, we wouldn't be married anymore. No drama necessary.

I've requested to him that if I die in the middle of an unfinished writing project, I want him to pass on the results to my existing readers via my blog. As for my existing copyrights... I don't know. I think I'd like to specify that they pass into PD when I die. I haven't decided yet. (This is why I haven't updated the will yet.)

I would of course love to make a billion dollars as an author. But I don't want to lose sight of my deeply held belief that I owe everything to my wonderful readers.

ETA: And he's a bedroom programmer as a hobbyist. I don't think we've had the discussion, but were he to die first, I'm pretty sure he'd like me to disseminate the code for whatever project he had going at the time. His most popular program is donation supported.

QuantumIguana · 03-01-2012, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belfaborac

Of course it doesn't.

I just demonstrated quite clearly that is does. Just because there is a contract, the publisher isn't obligated to actually sell the book, and even if they did, no one would buy it from that publisher. They would buy it from the publisher who was under no obligation to pay the author's estate anything, because that second publisher could afford to sell it for less.

Belfaborac · 03-01-2012, 05:03 PM

You did no such thing, but I think I'll leave it here regardless. I need a snack, then I'll stick a movie on and in any case I've spent quite enough time on stuff which will not come to pass in my life time. You have my permission to treat my tired withdrawal as a victory if you so desire.

Andrew H. · 03-01-2012, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xg4bx

copyright should end at death. does your family keep collecting money in perpetuity if you spent your life working in a warehouse? no. so why should they if you wrote a book?

Why should they if you own stock? Or rental property? Or farmland?

Labor is not the the same as property, and it never has been.

QuantumIguana · 03-01-2012, 05:14 PM

I notice you made no effort to refute anything I said. This is probably because you can't. I'll make it simple.

Let us stipulate that copyright expires at a person's death, and that an author has a contract with a publisher, giving a 30% royalty.

The author dies, and at that moment, the book becomes public domain.

This means anyone can publish it.

Other publishers exist.

Any one of these publishers can sell the book, because it is in the public domain.

These other publishers are not bound by the contract between the author and the original publisher.

The other publishers do not have to pay royalties on this book.

Because they do not need to pay royalties, the other publishers can sell the book more cheaply than can the original publishers.

The original publisher will not be able to make money selling the book at all, and therefore, will not sell it.

Which of these premises do you disagree with? I don't need to take your withdrawal as victory, I know that I have facts and logic on my side.

Andrew H. · 03-01-2012, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belfaborac

I'm pretty sure you know full well that that is a false assumption. An author's copyrights are part of his assets only because current laws say they are. Laws can be changed, to make this no longer be the case.

Yeah, laws can be changed to do anything, including prohibiting inheritance. What is your point? Copyrights are property right now that can be passed down like any other property.

QuantumIguana · 03-01-2012, 05:17 PM

Copyright is ending at the death of the author is not the only alternative to perpetual copyright.

Ninjalawyer · 03-01-2012, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PKFFW

I guess your ability to spot irony and facetiousness only extends to editorials and not thread replies.

Drat! I'm going to plead a modified form of Poe's Law on this one. Poe's law states:

Quote:

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing.

Of course, you'll have to replace "fundamentalism" with "eternal copyright", but you get the idea.

Ninjalawyer · 03-01-2012, 08:25 PM

I feel like this conversation has gotten hung up on the idea of copyright ending at the death of the author. Would there be any objection to it just ending after some number of years, say something between 20 to 300,000 without reference to the life of the author?

PKFFW · 03-01-2012, 10:06 PM

I don't see why it can't be something like death or X number of years, which ever is later. That way the older stuff goes PD when the author dies and yet still covers circumstances where the author dies unexpectedly or has published late in life.

mrscoach · 03-01-2012, 10:12 PM

I wouldn't object to a set number, regardless of the author's life status. I can see the benefit of that. Surely a author can squeeze all they can out of X years. I do see a POSSIBLE need for some short extension. Say they write the first book and it does modestly well. Maybe even several books. Years later they write a huge hit and it renews interest in their first books. What if those books were going out of copyright or just went out? I don't see where the publisher should reap all the rewards.

But you know what? I don't know the answer and this is why I am not the one in charge. I am terrible at these types of decisions. LOL I give myself a headache if I think of all sides for too long.

QuantumIguana · 03-01-2012, 10:45 PM

I may be satisfied not to have the copyright period extended further. One problem with extending the copyright term for the small percentage of works that still have commercial value is that a lot of other works fall through the cracks.

carpetmojo · 03-02-2012, 03:27 AM

...."does your family keep collecting money in perpetuity if you spent your life working in a warehouse? .."

Ummmm.... presumably said family might - if it's in a signed legal contract that they will.

And ....you'd need a lawyer, prob'ly, to fight off the company that realised what twit's they'd been.

[ P'raps a profitable opening here for Ninja ?

]

03-02-2012, 03:27 AM	#90
carpetmojo Wizard Posts: 3,117 Karma: 9269999 Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: UK Device: Sony- T3, PRS650, 350, T1/2/3, Paperwhite, Fire 8.9,Samsung Tab S 10.5	Well, let's see......... ...."does your family keep collecting money in perpetuity if you spent your life working in a warehouse? .." Ummmm.... presumably said family might - if it's in a signed legal contract that they will. And ....you'd need a lawyer, prob'ly, to fight off the company that realised what twit's they'd been. [ P'raps a profitable opening here for Ninja ? ]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Humor Swift, Jonathan: A Modest Proposal. 18 Aug 07	RWood	Kindle Books	1	05-23-2014 02:26 PM
Humor Swift, Jonathan: A Modest Proposal. 20 Dec 2007	RWood	IMP Books	0	12-20-2007 10:08 PM
Humor Swift, Jonathan: A Modest Proposal	RWood	BBeB/LRF Books	2	04-21-2007 07:01 PM

03-01-2012, 05:03 PM	#80
Belfaborac Wizard Posts: 1,498 Karma: 5199835 Join Date: May 2010 Location: Norway Device: Sony PRS-505, PRS-950	You did no such thing, but I think I'll leave it here regardless. I need a snack, then I'll stick a movie on and in any case I've spent quite enough time on stuff which will not come to pass in my life time. You have my permission to treat my tired withdrawal as a victory if you so desire.

03-01-2012, 05:14 PM	#82
QuantumIguana Philosopher Posts: 2,034 Karma: 18736532 Join Date: Jan 2012 Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch	I notice you made no effort to refute anything I said. This is probably because you can't. I'll make it simple. Let us stipulate that copyright expires at a person's death, and that an author has a contract with a publisher, giving a 30% royalty. The author dies, and at that moment, the book becomes public domain. This means anyone can publish it. Other publishers exist. Any one of these publishers can sell the book, because it is in the public domain. These other publishers are not bound by the contract between the author and the original publisher. The other publishers do not have to pay royalties on this book. Because they do not need to pay royalties, the other publishers can sell the book more cheaply than can the original publishers. The original publisher will not be able to make money selling the book at all, and therefore, will not sell it. Which of these premises do you disagree with? I don't need to take your withdrawal as victory, I know that I have facts and logic on my side.

03-01-2012, 05:17 PM	#84
QuantumIguana Philosopher Posts: 2,034 Karma: 18736532 Join Date: Jan 2012 Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch	Copyright is ending at the death of the author is not the only alternative to perpetual copyright.

03-01-2012, 08:25 PM	#86
Ninjalawyer Guru Posts: 826 Karma: 18573626 Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Canada Device: Kobo Touch, Nexus 7 (2013)	I feel like this conversation has gotten hung up on the idea of copyright ending at the death of the author. Would there be any objection to it just ending after some number of years, say something between 20 to 300,000 without reference to the life of the author?

03-01-2012, 10:06 PM	#87
PKFFW Wizard Posts: 3,681 Karma: 28297636 Join Date: Dec 2008 Device: BeBook, Sony PRS-T1, Kobo H2O	I don't see why it can't be something like death or X number of years, which ever is later. That way the older stuff goes PD when the author dies and yet still covers circumstances where the author dies unexpectedly or has published late in life.

03-01-2012, 10:12 PM	#88
mrscoach Guru Posts: 763 Karma: 4837659 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: San Angelo Texas Device: Samsung Galaxy tab	I wouldn't object to a set number, regardless of the author's life status. I can see the benefit of that. Surely a author can squeeze all they can out of X years. I do see a POSSIBLE need for some short extension. Say they write the first book and it does modestly well. Maybe even several books. Years later they write a huge hit and it renews interest in their first books. What if those books were going out of copyright or just went out? I don't see where the publisher should reap all the rewards. But you know what? I don't know the answer and this is why I am not the one in charge. I am terrible at these types of decisions. LOL I give myself a headache if I think of all sides for too long.

03-01-2012, 10:45 PM	#89
QuantumIguana Philosopher Posts: 2,034 Karma: 18736532 Join Date: Jan 2012 Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch	I may be satisfied not to have the copyright period extended further. One problem with extending the copyright term for the small percentage of works that still have commercial value is that a lot of other works fall through the cracks.

Advert

Advert