4 ms·
> in most cases the remaining family had never held the copyright; the author had initally sold the reproduction rights to a publisher He was able to sell it b
by golergka 2y ago
> in most cases the remaining family had never held the copyright; the author had initally sold the reproduction rights to a publisher
He was able to sell it because it is something valuable, exactly because of the copyright protections. Regardless of whether author sells the rights or not, he and his family would equally be better off with copyright.
- grayhatter 2y agoWhy does this argument remind me so much of those of slavery apologist arguments? copyright as written serves the interests of publishers who don't create valuable works more than the creators of the work...