3 ms·
It’s fine that society should benefit, but why should the publishers who pay the author nothing benefit the most? (Edit: Not just republishers of the original
by bdowling 3y ago
It’s fine that society should benefit, but why should the publishers who pay the author nothing benefit the most?
(Edit: Not just republishers of the original work, but also those making derivatives like translations, sequels, or movie/TV adaptations.)
- concordDance 3y agoActually, without copyright the publishers will be getting almost nothing as with everyone being able to publish the price will quickly go down to printing and postage.
- bdowling 3y agoMakers of derivative works such as foreign language translations, sequels, and movie adaptations could presumably hold monopolies on those.
- Fargren 3y agoI'm sure they could release those things, but how could they hold a monopoly when everyone is allowed to do their own translations, sequels, and movie adaptations? Maybe there would be some big successful publishers with that business model, but that seems like a good thing if they produce good content.
- ncallaway 3y ago> but why should the publishers who pay the author nothing benefit the most? How do the publishers benefit from a work that enters the public domain? They have no more right to use the work than anyone else. I think the margins for publishers would be very low after a work enters the public domain.
- bdowling 3y agoDerivative works like translations, sequels, TV/movie adaptations, etc.
- mitchdoogle 3y agoWhy are they making derivatives of a work that nobody cared about? If someone else comes along and makes a profitable derivative, seems like they have added something that the original author just didn't have (Better story, Better marketing, etc)