Because discussion of copyright law deserves its own post

In response to a thread on copyright in my last post, junoxxiv argues for the datedness of copyright law.

I do think there are ways in which copyright law is flawed, and needs reforming. I also am open to the idea that there may be a better system that we will find one day, that will allow artists to create and be reasonably compensated for their work.

I also think we haven’t found that system yet.

Here’s some of what I said in the comments section of my last post.

It’s true that I’m not getting rich right now (to be fair, neither are my publishers, based on my work), but it’s also true that I’m being paid more than I would under any other system I’ve seen so far. And–and this is a big thing, too–I’m getting distribution, which none of the toss-it-out-there, hope-someone-notices-and-decides-to-pay-for-it models provide.

I do know several writers have tried “I’ll-give-the-work-away, pay-if-you like-it, I-seek-no-control-over-it voluntary systems,” and I’ve not heard of any that have really worked; and I definitely haven’t heard of any that have worked in a reproduceable, a significant-number-of-writers-can-earn-a-living way. his career got to the point it did

And people only consider trying even these models because the writer gets some control over distribution. Go to a system where its not only the writer who can send out free copies as part of a marketing strategy, but anyone else who wants to can send out free copies as well, or pretty bound copies they charge for without passing on anything of the profits, and getting people to pay the writer becomes even more of a challenge.

There may be a better model out there that we’ll find one day–but from a making-a-living perspective, we’ve yet to find one that works–that works right now, in a will-pay-a-writer’s-rent sort of way, and is not merely a nice theory that might work out one day.

And I’m not willing to spend even less time than I already can manage writing fiction for the next few decades until we figure it out.

I do think extending copyright more than a few years beyond the life of the author is an abuse of the system–copyright is not meant to be the same as ownership. But it is meant to help writers have enough control for enough time that they can support themselves.

An aside: Tolkien lost millions of dollars because an unscrupulous publisher was able to print the U.S. edition without paying him, due to a loophole in copyright law at the time. Without copyright law, any publisher could take my work and do that, once that work was somewhere they could copy it. Without copyright, anyone could produce any work in any way they want to, and not only pay no one, but also collect a tidy profit for themselves.

In other words, without copyright–and without a viable replacement system–publishers are still free to profit off of writers’ works. And they no longer even need the writer’s consent to do so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *