2 ms·

I can get the anger against publishers, who seem to add almost no value to the process. But what’s wrong with the authors charging a licensing fee as described

I can get the anger against publishers, who seem to add almost no value to the process. But what’s wrong with the authors charging a licensing fee as described here? They deserve a right to charge what the market will support for their work, like everyone else. Personally I don’t even think this change matters - reducing the number of holds to 10 is very reasonable and I bet most will not even do enough reading to make those holds “worth it”

int_19h 3y ago
In the absence of artificial monopoly that is copyright, "what the market will support" is zero, though. And copyright, despite the name, is not a right - it's a privilege granted by society, with the notion that it is a net benefit for said society. Libraries are a part of that equation, and it's not unreasonable to expect some special dispensations there.