5 ms·

This artist created something that got widely recognized, and the genesis of it (he alleges) was widely misrepresented by both Ellis and Anderson. Also, he got

This artist created something that got widely recognized, and the genesis of it (he alleges) was widely misrepresented by both Ellis and Anderson. Also, he got paid squat compared to what the album generated in sales. Unless you are Spock from Star Trek, you are going to have some feelings of frustration, indignation, and envy from that experience.

lopmotr 9y ago
If that frustrates you, then all of life is going to be endless pain. Why didn't you buy shares on company X (Twitter, Facebook, whatever) back when it was cheap? Why didn't you make every decision in your life the lucky way by correctly guessing the future? It's impossible not to constantly miss opportunities that involve guessing the future. If he had negotiated for a royalty, they might have refused. Perhaps he regrets not trying to negotiate. If he had tried and still got the same deal, I can't imagine any way he could regret it.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  Life doesn't become 'endless pain' just because you think that some amount of royalties should be the default. Imagine if it was just there, without being negotiated. Not a large enough amount to meaningfully affect the budget, just enough for huge successes to give a payout.
tvmalsv 9y ago
Doesn't matter to me what he got paid. If he wanted royalties, too, he should have negotiated that into the agreement, and he probably would have been paid even less of an upfront amount. He's not the one exposing himself to the risk involved with creating the project. By taking the fixed rate, he had a guaranteed return on his investment and didn't have to worry about the success or failure of the album.
- jancsika 9y ago
  @donatj I could swear I was responding to a comment that read, "I have trouble having empathy for..." But now I look back and I read, "I have trouble feeling bad for..." Did you silently edit your comment, or did I accidentally misread it? I meant to respond to the topic of someone failing to empathize with another human being, which is a completely different conversation than someone failing to feel pity for another human being.
bloak 9y ago
You're right about people being irrational. If you're worried about someone else getting rich from your work, while you get nothing, but it's impracticable to get royalties because the work will be used to create various derived works in various unforseeable ways, then perhaps the thing to do is offer them, in return for an immediate cash payment, non-exclusive rights for ever, but exclusive rights only for the first five years. You'd probably have to put something in about the purchaser licensing back to you any other necessary rights (e.g. trademarks) to make this work, but it might then mean you'd get a second chance at negotiating five years later. In the case of the cover of a successful record, either they come back to you five years later with more cash, or else you sell your remaining rights to someone else who wants to make T-shirts or whatever. Or you donate the image to the public domain if that's what you prefer. I'm suggesting this approach not so much as a business plan but as a way of avoiding irrational feelings of frustration or indignation, but it might also be a good business plan in some cases. Personally I like non-exclusive rights. It helps avoid orphaning of works and ridiculous situations in which it's impossible to republish a book unless you can get 19 people to all agree and give permission because that's how many people might have inherited a share in some required exclusive right.

lopmotr 9y ago

If that frustrates you, then all of life is going to be endless pain. Why didn't you buy shares on company X (Twitter, Facebook, whatever) back when it was cheap? Why didn't you make every decision in your life the lucky way by correctly guessing the future? It's impossible not to constantly miss opportunities that involve guessing the future. If he had negotiated for a royalty, they might have refused. Perhaps he regrets not trying to negotiate. If he had tried and still got the same deal, I can't imagine any way he could regret it.

Dylan16807 9y ago
Life doesn't become 'endless pain' just because you think that some amount of royalties should be the default. Imagine if it was just there, without being negotiated. Not a large enough amount to meaningfully affect the budget, just enough for huge successes to give a payout.

tvmalsv 9y ago

Doesn't matter to me what he got paid. If he wanted royalties, too, he should have negotiated that into the agreement, and he probably would have been paid even less of an upfront amount. He's not the one exposing himself to the risk involved with creating the project. By taking the fixed rate, he had a guaranteed return on his investment and didn't have to worry about the success or failure of the album.

jancsika 9y ago
@donatj I could swear I was responding to a comment that read, "I have trouble having empathy for..." But now I look back and I read, "I have trouble feeling bad for..." Did you silently edit your comment, or did I accidentally misread it? I meant to respond to the topic of someone failing to empathize with another human being, which is a completely different conversation than someone failing to feel pity for another human being.

bloak 9y ago

You're right about people being irrational. If you're worried about someone else getting rich from your work, while you get nothing, but it's impracticable to get royalties because the work will be used to create various derived works in various unforseeable ways, then perhaps the thing to do is offer them, in return for an immediate cash payment, non-exclusive rights for ever, but exclusive rights only for the first five years. You'd probably have to put something in about the purchaser licensing back to you any other necessary rights (e.g. trademarks) to make this work, but it might then mean you'd get a second chance at negotiating five years later. In the case of the cover of a successful record, either they come back to you five years later with more cash, or else you sell your remaining rights to someone else who wants to make T-shirts or whatever. Or you donate the image to the public domain if that's what you prefer. I'm suggesting this approach not so much as a business plan but as a way of avoiding irrational feelings of frustration or indignation, but it might also be a good business plan in some cases. Personally I like non-exclusive rights. It helps avoid orphaning of works and ridiculous situations in which it's impossible to republish a book unless you can get 19 people to all agree and give permission because that's how many people might have inherited a share in some required exclusive right.