6 ms·
>Audible giving creators only a 25% cut (or 40% if they sign an exclusive deal) is absolutely exploitative. Also, who are the creators? I mean, does the author
by torben-friis 4y ago
>Audible giving creators only a 25% cut (or 40% if they sign an exclusive deal) is absolutely exploitative.
Also, who are the creators? I mean, does the author of the book have to share that piece of the cake with the narrator as well? that makes the cut even lower.
- LegitShady 4y agowhy would anyone give a % of income to a narrator? That's a service you pay for once and thats it. They don't have to read it again for each customer. They just get hired to read and record it the first time.
- taeric 4y agoThis is silly. You could use the same argument for the writer. And, indeed, this is done. If I'm remembering correctly, Hardy Boys and such were done this way, with the actual writer paid in a different way.
- LegitShady 4y agowhen the writer is not the primary owner of the property it would make sense. When the writer is the primary owner and creator it does not.
- taeric 4y agoThis feels contrived. And is in the face of, for example, how Disney tried to not pay a Star Wars writer. I agree it feels like this could be easy to argue one way or another. I am willing to assert it is often not simple and many of the complications are from pushing simple solutions.
- LegitShady 4y ago>This feels contrived How so? >how Disney tried to not pay a Star Wars writer. the star wars writer is just a contract worker. He doesn't own star wars etc. But he should still get paid according to the agreement disney inherited.
- taeric 4y agoContrived because, "primary owner" of a story is somewhat silly. It kind of works for one off books, but even there has issues. Get into performances and collaborations, and it falls hard. You will quickly get into situations where corporations own things, and then all semblance of personal ownership and control are questionable, at best.
- matsemann 4y agoWhat about the writer that "only writes it once"? Or a singer on an album that only sings it once?
- LegitShady 4y agoThey are the primary creator of the work. The narrator is not.
- plorg 4y agoThe narrator is similarly inseparable from the performative work (as, say, an orchestral recording of a symphony), the only difference seems to rest in who has the power and incentive to claim royalties. None of this explicitly follows from first principles, it's all just negotiation for what, through the vehicle of contract law, will get enforced by social convention and the fist of the government.
- LegitShady 4y ago>None of this explicitly follows from first principles, it's all just negotiation for what, through the vehicle of contract law, will get enforced by social convention and the fist of the government. Absolutely. But there are many more people who can voice audiobooks than there are high quality writers, and the writer's work is being the primary author of the work. It doesn't make any sense for the owner to give % of the profit unless the narrator would attract business on their own.
- taeric 4y agoI have tried some books based on the narrator...
- frosted-flakes 4y agoActually, this is my favourite way to find new authors. As an example, R.C. Bray narrated The Martian by Andy Weir, and I loved his narration so much I looked for other books that Bray had narrated. One such book was Planetside by Michael Mammay, which was Mammay's first and only book at the time. I have since read all 5 of his books, and he's now one of my favourite authors.
- Uvix 4y agoDepends on the deal the author negotiated with the narrator (i.e. were they paid up front or in royalties). That money comes out of the author's 40%.