11 ms·
In ten words or less: Working-for-hire disenfranchises artists.
by lidHanteyk 7y ago
In ten words or less: Working-for-hire disenfranchises artists.
- em-bee 7y agoif i read it correctly, the publishers have been able to push the idea that getting paid for a copyright work is work for hire. now i am envisioning a different publishing model where publishers don't get ownership over the copyright but get a commission on the distribution of the work. like mobile phone app markets. the creators keep their copyright, but the distributors get a share of the revenue. does this exist already? how does amazon sell books by self-publishing authors?
- Mathnerd314 7y agoA misleading summary, not in the least because artists have no voting rights to exercise. It's mostly about how copyright laws always favor publishers rather than readers or authors. Publishers use their strong market position to extract favorable terms in contracts, like exclusive assignment of copyright, and courts have consistently found these agreements valid. This leads to strange situations like being sued for copying yourself. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2000/jul/11/artsfeatures3 https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2000/jul/11/artsfeatures... The author suggests collective bargaining, market competition from new digital services, and publicizing contract terms as solutions. Personally I lean towards the digital services.