7 ms·
In this case, Lucas Arts is equivalent to the mob and is forcing someone to pay money for their book? > I stopped getting paid by Microsoft when I stopped work
by oh_sigh 6y ago
In this case, Lucas Arts is equivalent to the mob and is forcing someone to pay money for their book?
> I stopped getting paid by Microsoft when I stopped working there, even though a billion+ people are using some code that I had a hand in writing. That's the way it should be.
That's because there was nothing in your contract that you would make royalties for the code you wrote. So of course they wouldn't pay you. But what if they just stopped paying you while you were still working there?
> When a janitor finishes cleaning a room, does she get 10 cents every time someone enters that room for 80 years?
Again, no, because that's not what the contract says.
Do you have a problem with an author writing a book and then selling the book? Or is it just when an author is promised $X in royalties per sale from the company that is actually selling the books that is not ethical?
- breck 6y ago> In this case, Lucas Arts is equivalent to the mob and is forcing someone to pay money for their book? Absolutely. If you pay attention to the beginning of every Disney/Lucas Arts movie, they all start with the threat of violence (proof: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/L3OPoOUMQ2M/hqdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/L3OPoOUMQ2M/hqdefault.jpg). And those aren't baseball bats the FBI carries around in their holsters. > But what if they just stopped paying you while you were still working there? I would stop working there. Many years ago I was a contractor and that happened with a client every now and again. > Do you have a problem with an author writing a book and then selling the book? Nope, no problems with an author writing a book, getting paid to write a book, or giving a book they've written to someone in return for cash. I have a problem with an author expecting "royalties" via an "Imaginary Property Law" scheme enforced by violence.
- oh_sigh 6y agoLet's say I'm a private individual who thinks the world would love a book on robot kittens. The author I want to write the book says she will do it for $1M. But I don't have $1M to pay her. So we both agree that I will pay her some lesser amount, say $100,000, and then give her $1 for every book I sell. She's hoping I will sell more than 900,000 books, and I'm also hoping that. What exactly is unethical about that? How is that any less ethical than an author selling their own book directly, or selling their book wholesale to some other party (who then sells the book)?
- breck 6y agoAbsolutely nothing unethical about that. Perhaps foolish, from a business standpoint (I don't know much about robot kittens, but I have to admit it does sound intriguing), but nothing unethical. What is unethical is saying, "you write a book on kittens, I'll print and sell the books and if anyone who buys it from me then tried to make copies, I'll have the government pay them a visit with guns". And that is exactly how our Imaginary Property system works.
- oh_sigh 6y agoBut that's the way it works with an author who sells their own books as well - which you've said you're okay with.
- jholman 6y agoIt seems pretty straightforward what breck is claiming, I'm astonished at the incomprehension and downvotes. Breck has said, plainly, that the author is welcome to write a book and sell copies (on robot kittens or otherwise). Or accept money for writing a book, or offer money to write a book, with or without selling copies. Breck has also claimed that it is unethical for the author to attempt to control what purchasers of that book do with those copies, e.g. make copies of their own and sell them. Relatedly, they claim that it's unethical to profit off of someone else enforcing such control. In modern legal systems, if that purchaser sells copies, likely the author will ask the government to exercise their monopoly on violence to stop the copier, claiming that the copier violates "copy right", the right to control copying. Breck is saying that it is unethical for the government to stop this copying, and unethical for the author to ask the government to do so. This is a very coherent and reasonable position, though you may reasonably disagree. From this, breck reasons that if ADF has a contract with Disney that, to make any sense at all, requires that copyright be enforced, then defaults on this rogue's contract are not breck's ethical business, and thus breck is not sad that the contract is being violated. Much as breck would not be sad on the carpenter's behalf if the mob boss didn't pay his licensing fee, because the whole contract between the mob boss and the carpenter is (according to breck) unethical.
- jacobush 6y agoAll our laws are enforced by violence.