yaboycon Groupie United Kingdom Joined 4733 days ago 40 posts - 50 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Russian
| Message 25 of 52 04 January 2012 at 10:53pm | IP Logged |
Cainntear wrote:
yaboycon wrote:
If I published a book in 2050, I would feel great if people were using my book in 2100 even for free. |
|
|
That would really depend on whether you felt you had recouped the fair recompense for your work by this time.
Imagine if you were living in poverty at the time and people are running around with copies of your book that someone else printed without paying you a penny. I doubt you'd be happy in that situation.
Actually, a lot of publishing deals specify that the rights revert to the original author after a certain amount of time -- the author may strip out the publisher's branding and trademarks and relaunch it if they want... but most don't want to.
I'm only aware of one author who has gone to the effort of creating a new edition of an old book -- that's Roibeard O Maolalaigh who took the Hugo out of his book Scottish Gaelic in Three Months and released an updated edition as Scottish Gaelic in Twelve Weeks.
Some university lecturers have released their grammar books free and unaltered, but I believe part of the motivation for that is it allows them to continue refer to them in their lecture notes, rather than having to rewrite their courses to match the layout of a new book.
So my point is that if authors really wanted to release their materials for free after X years, they would -- very few books are "sat on" by the publisher. |
|
|
forgot to add, I will be dead by 2100. My point was, the thought of people still finding my work useful would make me happy. I'd like it protected while I was alive
edit: also if I was actually alive and living in poverty I doubt the sale of a few more copies of my book will make a difference in my life. That is not the scenario I was giving though, I forgot to say I would be long dead by 2100 (which I probably will be)
Edited by yaboycon on 04 January 2012 at 10:56pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
s0fist Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5044 days ago 260 posts - 445 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: Sign Language, German, Spanish, French
| Message 26 of 52 05 January 2012 at 1:10am | IP Logged |
yaboycon and Elexi brought up a few interesting points:
1) despite all the hard work, most content creators never really see any kind of profit
2) most of them want their work to make a contribution (presumably both after their death and while they live)
So why don't any (significant number) of them release their work to be distributed for free (either completely or while still retaining the miserly profit from physical copies).
Obviously, there are real pros and cons to this in each particular case, but imho the majority of obscure content creators (authors and publishing houses) would only benefit, especially long term.
I know this kind of thing is legally nearly impossible to accomplish for example in Russia.
However I'm sure in the U.S. and (maybe) Europe this would be a fairly easy task on the part of the authors and content creators.
I really would love to see that kind of thing happen.
I bet it will start happening more and more until a critical mass picks up and
eventually publishing houses would join, if only to say they're not "old, evil, and obsolete"
(if not with their star content at least with older or less popular material).
1 person has voted this message useful
|
yaboycon Groupie United Kingdom Joined 4733 days ago 40 posts - 50 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Russian
| Message 27 of 52 05 January 2012 at 3:30am | IP Logged |
s0fist wrote:
yaboycon and Elexi brought up a few interesting points:
1) despite all the hard work, most content creators never really see any kind of profit
2) most of them want their work to make a contribution (presumably both after their death and while they live)
So why don't any (significant number) of them release their work to be distributed for free (either completely or while still retaining the miserly profit from physical copies).
Obviously, there are real pros and cons to this in each particular case, but imho the majority of obscure content creators (authors and publishing houses) would only benefit, especially long term.
I know this kind of thing is legally nearly impossible to accomplish for example in Russia.
However I'm sure in the U.S. and (maybe) Europe this would be a fairly easy task on the part of the authors and content creators.
I really would love to see that kind of thing happen.
I bet it will start happening more and more until a critical mass picks up and
eventually publishing houses would join, if only to say they're not "old, evil, and obsolete"
(if not with their star content at least with older or less popular material). |
|
|
been trying to get in contact with the copyright holders of the old Teach Yourself books but they havent emailed me back. I think they dont really have much interest because they dont produce language books any,more. I just wanted to find out the status of some of the copyrights
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6009 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh
| Message 28 of 52 05 January 2012 at 11:14am | IP Logged |
yaboycon wrote:
I forgot to add, I will be dead by 2100. My point was, the thought of people still finding my work useful would make me happy. I'd like it protected while I was alive |
|
|
I assume most writers include the rights to their works in their wills. I don't recall hearing of anyone ascribing their rights to the public domain. I therefore conclude that a lot of actual writers do not agree with your position.
And right now, writers are starting to get their back-catalogues back onto the virtual shelves as ebooks and thanks to print-in-demand technology.
The same technologies that make the free reproduction of out-of-copyright works practical, also take away any impetus to free up old works, as the author or his estate still have the opportunity to try to profit from the work.
And of course, there's plenty of people out there who're just bundling out-of-copyright stuff as ebooks or PoD, so there's even less impetus to release something for free if somebody else is just going to turn up and cash in on it.
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
s0fist Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5044 days ago 260 posts - 445 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: Sign Language, German, Spanish, French
| Message 29 of 52 05 January 2012 at 7:10pm | IP Logged |
Cainntear wrote:
I assume most writers include the rights to their works in their wills. I don't recall hearing of anyone ascribing their rights to the public domain. I therefore conclude that a lot of actual writers do not agree with your position. |
|
|
I see lots of people not recycling or even throwing garbage on the street.
Do I therefore conclude they don't care about Earth and give up?
Or do I ask for more convenient garbage bins and promote public awareness of the issue?
Sometimes actions have more than one cause, I'm sure lots of writers don't put their works in public domain (and putting it in public domain is not the only option btw) because they don't see most other writers doing it and therefore conclude there's a reason why, even if it's just a status quo with no real reason behind it.
I'll also refer you to the popular anecdote about the grandma's cooking secret.
from the great Internet wrote:
One day, a woman was cooking a pot roast. She cut the ends off before putting it in the pan. Her daughter asked her "mom, why did you cut the ends off of the pot roast?" Her mom answered "because that's how my mom did it". That wasn't good enough for the girl, who went and asked her mom's mom why she cut the ends off of the pot roast before putting it in the pan. Her grandmother said "because that's how my mom did it". The girl carried on and asked her great grandmother why she cut the end off of the pot roast before she put it in the pan. Expecting to hear the same response, the great grandmother replied "because the pan was TOO SMALL".
|
|
|
3 persons have voted this message useful
|
Camundonguinho Triglot Senior Member Brazil Joined 4747 days ago 273 posts - 500 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English, Spanish Studies: Swedish
| Message 30 of 52 05 January 2012 at 9:03pm | IP Logged |
Most authors get less then 10% percent of it.
Greedy publishing companies take most of the cake.
In the future, I would like to see many privately released works in pdf format,
sold directly by the author.
Everyone would pay for it and all of us would be happy.
In the USA, fonts (typefaces) are not subject to copyright laws.
Anyone can change fonts made by others and resell them.
Not so in European Union.
Edited by Camundonguinho on 05 January 2012 at 9:06pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
sipes23 Diglot Senior Member United States pluteopleno.com/wprs Joined 4868 days ago 134 posts - 235 votes Speaks: English*, Latin Studies: Spanish, Ancient Greek, Persian
| Message 31 of 52 06 January 2012 at 2:39am | IP Logged |
Camundonguinho wrote:
Most authors get less then 10% percent of it.
Greedy publishing companies take most of the cake. |
|
|
I wouldn't call them greedy. They perform a valuable service that costs money. Marketing a book costs money. If
no one knows about your book, no one buys it. Now, admittedly this was more of a pre-internet concern...
Publishing companies also hire people like me. I like to eat and sleep inside, so they have to pay me for my time.
I do stuff like make sure there are no typos—want a book that shows the wrong vowel quantity? or tone? or
anything really? Pictures in books and on the cover cost money—either by paying photographers and illustrators
or by buying rights to existing material (ugh, more copyright stink). The editors do important stuff too, since I've
only mentioned the window dressing.
The problem with publishing companies is that they don't do anything that a motivated author can't do. But the
author probably has better things to do. I can say that for the authors of books I've worked on, they don't need
the royalties: they've got day jobs as college professors or high-school teachers. The real pay is the name on the
front cover, not that the royalties hurt.
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
joesoefkalla Newbie Indonesia Joined 4710 days ago 22 posts - 22 votes Studies: English
| Message 32 of 52 06 January 2012 at 2:22pm | IP Logged |
sipes23 wrote:
The real pay is the name on the front cover, not that the royalties hurt. |
|
|
Wow. I'm not a writer. But if this is the truth, then I'm shocked.
1 person has voted this message useful
|