[quote:49463d5098="tolworthy"]
Second, that is why freelancers get paid more than staffers - they have the extra costs of their own pension plan, etc. [/quote:49463d5098]
What brought you to the conclusion that freelancers are better off than people on a regular salary? For the majority of comics creators that simply isn't the case. We do this job because we love comics and if we can make a living out of it all the better. Sure, if we can work fast and get plenty of work we could be high earners but it's very hit and miss. Particularly in an ever-shrinking industry.
[quote:49463d5098="tolworthy"]Third, the great advantage of art over other occupations is that it is inherently satisfying, so why plan to retire? If the work is not inherently satisfying then it makes more sense to have a regular job instead.[/quote:49463d5098]
All comics work is satisfying and I'm sure we all give 100% whether it be self-owned or work for hire. But ideally we'd still like to wind down our lives in comfort, the same as anyone else. Your proposals would make that even less likely than it already is.
[quote:49463d5098="tolworthy"]I am not just talking hot air here. or of I am, then I will pay the price for my naivety. If you click on my link you'll see that I am making my own computer game. I renounce all copyright after twenty years, as by then I will rely on the old stuff to act as publicity for my new stuff. My computer game is my pension plan. I intend to work on it until the day I drop. I am putting my money where my mouth is.[/quote:49463d5098]
That's fine, because it's [i:49463d5098]your choice[/i:49463d5098]. What you proposed earlier in this thread though was a change in copyright effectively forcing your ideal on the entire industry. Can you not see how unethical that would be?
Lew
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
-
Lew Stringer
- Posts: 7041
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 00:59
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
And the fact that Lew, Steve and Nigel each have private jets to fly their artwork in from various tax havens around the globe doesn't weaken their argument one jot either!
-
Steve Bright
- Posts: 230
- Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 11:35
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
Beat me to it on all counts, Lew. Damn right again, as NP might (and probably will) say.
Tolworthy, I can see where you're coming from, and I accept that what you're proposing is held by you to be a good thing for all concerned. But there are other ways in which to promote the comics business that don't involve the further erosion of what little rights creators still enjoy. These may involve publishers and enthusiasts alike searching both souls and pockets in the short term, for the long-term good of the industry, but believe me, that is exactly what the vast majority of comics creators (artists and writers) have had to do just to survive for many years now. The balance can be redressed, but it requires a will to do so that is virtually impossible to elicit.
Tolworthy, I can see where you're coming from, and I accept that what you're proposing is held by you to be a good thing for all concerned. But there are other ways in which to promote the comics business that don't involve the further erosion of what little rights creators still enjoy. These may involve publishers and enthusiasts alike searching both souls and pockets in the short term, for the long-term good of the industry, but believe me, that is exactly what the vast majority of comics creators (artists and writers) have had to do just to survive for many years now. The balance can be redressed, but it requires a will to do so that is virtually impossible to elicit.
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]What brought you to the conclusion that freelancers are better off than people on a regular salary?[/quote:d96eb34a02]
Because where a choice exists then freelancers must have a reason to be freelance. E.g. back in the 1960s there was a difference in pay. The real problem IMO is that often no choice exists, and so the real need is to expand the market, thus increasing choices.
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]ideally we'd still like to wind down our lives in comfort, the same as anyone else. [/quote:d96eb34a02]
Speak for yourself. I want to do what I enjoy until I am no longer able, then take the hemlock. But granted, I may be unusual.
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]Your proposals would make that even less likely than it already is.[/quote:d96eb34a02]
I propose changes that would expand the market, thus increasing the value of the comics while in copyright, and increasing their brand trademark value forever. The alternative, the status quo, is for the comics market to curl up and die. What value are long copyrights when nobody wants the comics?
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]What you proposed earlier in this thread though was a change in copyright effectively forcing your ideal on the entire industry. Can you not see how unethical that would be?[/quote:d96eb34a02]
Unethical to promote a law that I believe would make people richer? Or unethical to believe differently from the mainstream?
Because where a choice exists then freelancers must have a reason to be freelance. E.g. back in the 1960s there was a difference in pay. The real problem IMO is that often no choice exists, and so the real need is to expand the market, thus increasing choices.
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]ideally we'd still like to wind down our lives in comfort, the same as anyone else. [/quote:d96eb34a02]
Speak for yourself. I want to do what I enjoy until I am no longer able, then take the hemlock. But granted, I may be unusual.
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]Your proposals would make that even less likely than it already is.[/quote:d96eb34a02]
I propose changes that would expand the market, thus increasing the value of the comics while in copyright, and increasing their brand trademark value forever. The alternative, the status quo, is for the comics market to curl up and die. What value are long copyrights when nobody wants the comics?
[quote:d96eb34a02="Lew Stringer"]What you proposed earlier in this thread though was a change in copyright effectively forcing your ideal on the entire industry. Can you not see how unethical that would be?[/quote:d96eb34a02]
Unethical to promote a law that I believe would make people richer? Or unethical to believe differently from the mainstream?
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
[quote:d7c106a0bb="Steve Bright"]The balance can be redressed, but it requires a will to do so that is virtually impossible to elicit. [/quote:d7c106a0bb]
Granted that I am as yet an armchair speculator, and not at the sharp end, so I must bow to your greater experience. But I see parallels with the movie industry. And the publishing industry in general. And the music industry. There are legions of talented independent creative people who work for pennies or less, and rage at the greed and stupidity of the big corporations. And they will continue to rage forever, sometimes scoring victories, other times seeing things get worse.
But meanwhile the those who embrace the free content idea (through YouTube, MySpace, Google, etc.) find new ways to raise revenue. And more importantly, bring new writers, directors, musicians, etc. to the public. The free content model isn't perfect, but it works.
Granted that I am as yet an armchair speculator, and not at the sharp end, so I must bow to your greater experience. But I see parallels with the movie industry. And the publishing industry in general. And the music industry. There are legions of talented independent creative people who work for pennies or less, and rage at the greed and stupidity of the big corporations. And they will continue to rage forever, sometimes scoring victories, other times seeing things get worse.
But meanwhile the those who embrace the free content idea (through YouTube, MySpace, Google, etc.) find new ways to raise revenue. And more importantly, bring new writers, directors, musicians, etc. to the public. The free content model isn't perfect, but it works.
-
Lew Stringer
- Posts: 7041
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 00:59
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
Because where a choice exists then freelancers must have a reason to be freelance. E.g. back in the 1960s there was a difference in pay. The real problem IMO is that often no choice exists, and so the real need is to expand the market, thus increasing choices.[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
The choice has never existed though. The large majority of comic creators have always been freelancers working from home. Even if there were numerous staff artist positions, as you seem to believe, it's unrealistic to expect every comics creator to move to Dundee or London.
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"][quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]ideally we'd still like to wind down our lives in comfort, the same as anyone else. [/quote:e1bf96c75c]
Speak for yourself. I want to do what I enjoy until I am no longer able, then take the hemlock. But granted, I may be unusual. [/quote:e1bf96c75c]
No, what I meant was financial comfort, not pipe and slippers comfort. Your proposal would make that difficult if not impossible for the majority of creators.
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"][quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]Your proposals would make that even less likely than it already is.[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
I propose changes that would expand the market, thus increasing the value of the comics while in copyright, and increasing their brand trademark value forever. The alternative, the status quo, is for the comics market to curl up and die. What value are long copyrights when nobody wants the comics?[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
I know you have everyone's best interests at heart but your proposals seem very naive. You seem to think that if 20 year old comics were suddenly free, then the public would start reading them and then go on to buy current comics. You may have a more optimistic view of human nature than I do but I think it's more likely that even if these new mythical hordes of readers were to lap up the freebies they'd just go on looking for more free comics, not buy new ones.
Anyway, how would these free comics get printed and distributed? Or do you propose that printers and distributors donate their services for free too? If so, how would they make any profit? Let's assume you're only talking about scans; who would do the scanning? Who would pay for the websites? How would you notify the public about these free comics?
[quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]What you proposed earlier in this thread though was a change in copyright effectively forcing your ideal on the entire industry. Can you not see how unethical that would be?[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"]Unethical to promote a law that I believe would make people richer? Or unethical to believe differently from the mainstream?[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
Unethical for you to propose a law which is basically all about engineering a way for you to get free comics.
Lew
The choice has never existed though. The large majority of comic creators have always been freelancers working from home. Even if there were numerous staff artist positions, as you seem to believe, it's unrealistic to expect every comics creator to move to Dundee or London.
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"][quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]ideally we'd still like to wind down our lives in comfort, the same as anyone else. [/quote:e1bf96c75c]
Speak for yourself. I want to do what I enjoy until I am no longer able, then take the hemlock. But granted, I may be unusual. [/quote:e1bf96c75c]
No, what I meant was financial comfort, not pipe and slippers comfort. Your proposal would make that difficult if not impossible for the majority of creators.
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"][quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]Your proposals would make that even less likely than it already is.[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
I propose changes that would expand the market, thus increasing the value of the comics while in copyright, and increasing their brand trademark value forever. The alternative, the status quo, is for the comics market to curl up and die. What value are long copyrights when nobody wants the comics?[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
I know you have everyone's best interests at heart but your proposals seem very naive. You seem to think that if 20 year old comics were suddenly free, then the public would start reading them and then go on to buy current comics. You may have a more optimistic view of human nature than I do but I think it's more likely that even if these new mythical hordes of readers were to lap up the freebies they'd just go on looking for more free comics, not buy new ones.
Anyway, how would these free comics get printed and distributed? Or do you propose that printers and distributors donate their services for free too? If so, how would they make any profit? Let's assume you're only talking about scans; who would do the scanning? Who would pay for the websites? How would you notify the public about these free comics?
[quote:e1bf96c75c="Lew Stringer"]What you proposed earlier in this thread though was a change in copyright effectively forcing your ideal on the entire industry. Can you not see how unethical that would be?[/quote:e1bf96c75c]
[quote:e1bf96c75c="tolworthy"]Unethical to promote a law that I believe would make people richer? Or unethical to believe differently from the mainstream?
[/quote:e1bf96c75c]Unethical for you to propose a law which is basically all about engineering a way for you to get free comics.
Lew
-
Lew Stringer
- Posts: 7041
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 00:59
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
[quote:9fd3a1fa85="tolworthy"][quote:9fd3a1fa85="Steve Bright"]The balance can be redressed, but it requires a will to do so that is virtually impossible to elicit. [/quote:9fd3a1fa85]
Granted that I am as yet an armchair speculator, and not at the sharp end, so I must bow to your greater experience. But I see parallels with the movie industry. And the publishing industry in general. And the music industry. There are legions of talented independent creative people who work for pennies or less, and rage at the greed and stupidity of the big corporations. And they will continue to rage forever, sometimes scoring victories, other times seeing things get worse.
But meanwhile the those who embrace the free content idea (through YouTube, MySpace, Google, etc.) find new ways to raise revenue. And more importantly, bring new writers, directors, musicians, etc. to the public. The free content model isn't perfect, but it works.[/quote:9fd3a1fa85]
Again, that's fine, because it's down to the creator's [b:9fd3a1fa85]choice[/b:9fd3a1fa85]. To adapt your comics proposal to your movie and music analogies it would mean that after 20 years all movies and music would be free of copyright and available for nowt. Now tell me how people in the film and music industries would "embrace" that!
Lew
Granted that I am as yet an armchair speculator, and not at the sharp end, so I must bow to your greater experience. But I see parallels with the movie industry. And the publishing industry in general. And the music industry. There are legions of talented independent creative people who work for pennies or less, and rage at the greed and stupidity of the big corporations. And they will continue to rage forever, sometimes scoring victories, other times seeing things get worse.
But meanwhile the those who embrace the free content idea (through YouTube, MySpace, Google, etc.) find new ways to raise revenue. And more importantly, bring new writers, directors, musicians, etc. to the public. The free content model isn't perfect, but it works.[/quote:9fd3a1fa85]
Again, that's fine, because it's down to the creator's [b:9fd3a1fa85]choice[/b:9fd3a1fa85]. To adapt your comics proposal to your movie and music analogies it would mean that after 20 years all movies and music would be free of copyright and available for nowt. Now tell me how people in the film and music industries would "embrace" that!
Lew
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
Tolworthy said:
"First, the residual payments from old work is practically zero for practically all artists - it makes no sense to rely on that for a pension."
Your new law isn't just applying to artists but all creators, including writers, I presume - who do often rely on royalties from building up as much of a lifetime of work as possible. But if you were the artist who drew, say, the Asterix or TinTin books, you should expect to receive a respectable income from them during your lifetime as long as they continued to line the shelves of book shops and sell.
Residual payments from old comic work *needn't* be practically nothing - look at the success of the DC Showcase and Marvel Essentials collections, as well as the aforementioned Asterix and TinTin books.
"Second, that is why freelancers get paid more than staffers - they have the extra costs of their own pension plan, etc. "
This bears no relation to reality, alas - staffers generally get paid plenty more than freelancers, and for many freelancers much of their time is often taken up trying to actually *get* the pay they're owed. Many writers barely make a decent living - and as well as no pension plan like staffers, they also get no paid leave. Many writers, including very well known names, die in poverty or near to poverty. I expect few artists end their working lives with a decent amount to retire on, either.
"Third, the great advantage of art over other occupations is that it is inherently satisfying, so why plan to retire?"
Ill health may force you to. Ill health of your wife, children or other family members might suddenly make looking after them a full time occupation. The industry may change so you no longer have any contacts. The very fact you've been around a long time may mean that your 'classics' of decades ago remain in print but you find it difficult to get new stuff commissioned because you're not a new name or are too associated with the past in commissioner's minds. US comic creators have spoken of this. People don't necessarily just choose to be hugely successful all their lives then just go ahead and do it. It's not that simple! Except for a select few, staying in print and staying in work in a very tough industry is difficult enough in itself.
"If the work is not inherently satisfying then it makes more sense to have a regular job instead."
What you're saying there is "harumph - get paid? Well, if those creative types aren't happy enough just being *allowed* to work on their projects for the joy of it, why don't they just get a job in a bank or an office like everyone else?" Fine - and we'd have a world without quality art or entertainment.
"With Hollywood Accounting, most original writers get a lot less money than they expect. Again, it's not something to rely on for a pension."
Tell that to J K Rowling or any writer with a good agent and who own the copyright to their material.
"That seems to be the best of both worlds. The public can use the original work, or an exact facsimile, as often as they like, but if they want anything new they have to pay. The whole purpose of my proposal is to make more money for creators (by increasing interest in the characters and creators) while increasing the benefit to society as a whole."
What you'd be doing would be ensuring that making a living as a creator would be even more difficult than it is now, ensuring more creators end their lives in poverty than already happens, and ultimately working towards depriving society of creative work - because who would work under such unfair conditions except amateurs happy to throw away all their basic rights?
Of course writers and artists *were* royally screwed for decades in the comics industry which had little respect for its creators, but many began to wise up about the situation in more recent times and conditions are now generally fairer in some areas.
"First, the residual payments from old work is practically zero for practically all artists - it makes no sense to rely on that for a pension."
Your new law isn't just applying to artists but all creators, including writers, I presume - who do often rely on royalties from building up as much of a lifetime of work as possible. But if you were the artist who drew, say, the Asterix or TinTin books, you should expect to receive a respectable income from them during your lifetime as long as they continued to line the shelves of book shops and sell.
Residual payments from old comic work *needn't* be practically nothing - look at the success of the DC Showcase and Marvel Essentials collections, as well as the aforementioned Asterix and TinTin books.
"Second, that is why freelancers get paid more than staffers - they have the extra costs of their own pension plan, etc. "
This bears no relation to reality, alas - staffers generally get paid plenty more than freelancers, and for many freelancers much of their time is often taken up trying to actually *get* the pay they're owed. Many writers barely make a decent living - and as well as no pension plan like staffers, they also get no paid leave. Many writers, including very well known names, die in poverty or near to poverty. I expect few artists end their working lives with a decent amount to retire on, either.
"Third, the great advantage of art over other occupations is that it is inherently satisfying, so why plan to retire?"
Ill health may force you to. Ill health of your wife, children or other family members might suddenly make looking after them a full time occupation. The industry may change so you no longer have any contacts. The very fact you've been around a long time may mean that your 'classics' of decades ago remain in print but you find it difficult to get new stuff commissioned because you're not a new name or are too associated with the past in commissioner's minds. US comic creators have spoken of this. People don't necessarily just choose to be hugely successful all their lives then just go ahead and do it. It's not that simple! Except for a select few, staying in print and staying in work in a very tough industry is difficult enough in itself.
"If the work is not inherently satisfying then it makes more sense to have a regular job instead."
What you're saying there is "harumph - get paid? Well, if those creative types aren't happy enough just being *allowed* to work on their projects for the joy of it, why don't they just get a job in a bank or an office like everyone else?" Fine - and we'd have a world without quality art or entertainment.
"With Hollywood Accounting, most original writers get a lot less money than they expect. Again, it's not something to rely on for a pension."
Tell that to J K Rowling or any writer with a good agent and who own the copyright to their material.
"That seems to be the best of both worlds. The public can use the original work, or an exact facsimile, as often as they like, but if they want anything new they have to pay. The whole purpose of my proposal is to make more money for creators (by increasing interest in the characters and creators) while increasing the benefit to society as a whole."
What you'd be doing would be ensuring that making a living as a creator would be even more difficult than it is now, ensuring more creators end their lives in poverty than already happens, and ultimately working towards depriving society of creative work - because who would work under such unfair conditions except amateurs happy to throw away all their basic rights?
Of course writers and artists *were* royally screwed for decades in the comics industry which had little respect for its creators, but many began to wise up about the situation in more recent times and conditions are now generally fairer in some areas.
-
Captain Storm
- Posts: 898
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 21:15
- Location: 1981
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
p.s.I'll still have my scans
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
[quote:7efa2935b7="Captain Storm"]
They are guilty in that to advertise their product they provide a scan to prove they have the product.The buyer is guilty in that he is buying from that source.After all copyrighted material is being offered for sale and he is party to that solely by the act of bidding or buying.[/quote:7efa2935b7]
Buying and selling second hand books or comics is perfectly legal - not piracy. And limited use of copyright material is usually allowed - as it is with reviews - so a scan of a cover to demonstrate a second hand item being sold would count as fair use and be unlikely to be breaking any laws.
They are guilty in that to advertise their product they provide a scan to prove they have the product.The buyer is guilty in that he is buying from that source.After all copyrighted material is being offered for sale and he is party to that solely by the act of bidding or buying.[/quote:7efa2935b7]
Buying and selling second hand books or comics is perfectly legal - not piracy. And limited use of copyright material is usually allowed - as it is with reviews - so a scan of a cover to demonstrate a second hand item being sold would count as fair use and be unlikely to be breaking any laws.
-
Captain Storm
- Posts: 898
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 21:15
- Location: 1981
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
Fair point Raven.We could argue about the whole subject for decades but life is too short.The simple fact is that scanning is here to stay and if pounced on by the big boys will only drive it underground and as is happening in the states,fans are putting brand new material online just to pee off publishers.(Now that most certainly impacts on Creators)I personally prefer my 40 year old musty Lions and Valiants any day.So instead of storing the images in my mind I am storing them on my hard drive.I wonder if the lawyers can confiscate my brain for storing copyrighted material 
Now see what you've made me do
In conclusion,I think the main point here is that Creators were basically ripped off first time around,we in our thousands bought the comics making over the years Millions for the comic companies,the writers/artists got a pittance,years later some multi national conglomerate bought a job lot of comic characters,started moaning about seeing scans on the Internet,and now we're all at each other's throats arguing about Law.None of us are most probably suitably qualified anyway.We're just fans passing around images of comics from 30/40 years ago.I still firmly believe we are not "robbing"(as "piracy" implies) as many of us paid for these first time around.Think of it all as taking photos and showing them to our friends.Fleetway and DC Thomson are not rushing to the printers any time soon to reprint the full runs of Warlord,Lion,Valiant etc.No harm done.
Now see what you've made me do In conclusion,I think the main point here is that Creators were basically ripped off first time around,we in our thousands bought the comics making over the years Millions for the comic companies,the writers/artists got a pittance,years later some multi national conglomerate bought a job lot of comic characters,started moaning about seeing scans on the Internet,and now we're all at each other's throats arguing about Law.None of us are most probably suitably qualified anyway.We're just fans passing around images of comics from 30/40 years ago.I still firmly believe we are not "robbing"(as "piracy" implies) as many of us paid for these first time around.Think of it all as taking photos and showing them to our friends.Fleetway and DC Thomson are not rushing to the printers any time soon to reprint the full runs of Warlord,Lion,Valiant etc.No harm done.
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
[quote:611342c838="Captain Storm"]We're just fans passing around images of comics from 30/40 years ago.I still firmly believe we are not "robbing"(as "piracy" implies) as many of us paid for these first time around.Think of it all as taking photos and showing them to our friends.Fleetway and DC Thomson are not rushing to the printers any time soon to reprint the full runs of Warlord,Lion,Valiant etc.No harm done.[/quote:611342c838]
I think people were mainly arguing in detail against Tolworthy's suggestion that there should be a new law that copyright should run out after 20 years, Cap' and creators deserve no income from official reprints and publications and the like from works they created in the past. (No bad feelings whatsoever towards Tolworthy, though - all in the spirit of healthy debate!)
I think some people take things to another level though when they scan entire runs of Marvel and DC comics and *sell* them on Ebay for a profit, claiming it's public domain - they must know they're wading in very dicey waters and in danger of prosecution.
I think people were mainly arguing in detail against Tolworthy's suggestion that there should be a new law that copyright should run out after 20 years, Cap' and creators deserve no income from official reprints and publications and the like from works they created in the past. (No bad feelings whatsoever towards Tolworthy, though - all in the spirit of healthy debate!)
I think some people take things to another level though when they scan entire runs of Marvel and DC comics and *sell* them on Ebay for a profit, claiming it's public domain - they must know they're wading in very dicey waters and in danger of prosecution.
-
Captain Storm
- Posts: 898
- Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 21:15
- Location: 1981
- Contact:
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
Hi Raven,yeah you're right.Copyright and Creators getting messed around always seems to overlap in these threads.I am on the side of Creators as it is their work I celebrate.I couldn't give a hoot about this law or that,because I am just a simple farm boy from the Planet..oops,Star Wars just crept in there 
I think creators should be able to retain their copyright and reissue their work if they so wish,but we know that ain't gonna happen.I think estates of late artists/writers should get a pay off but that ain't gonna happen.I came in late in the thread and got all emotional as usually happens but I disagree with creators losing copyright after 20 years.But I think publishers chasing scanners over 40 year old material that they are quite happy to see crumble into dust is just juvenile.NOT one red cent is being made.We're just sharing the joy is all. Have a nice day,y'all!
I think creators should be able to retain their copyright and reissue their work if they so wish,but we know that ain't gonna happen.I think estates of late artists/writers should get a pay off but that ain't gonna happen.I came in late in the thread and got all emotional as usually happens but I disagree with creators losing copyright after 20 years.But I think publishers chasing scanners over 40 year old material that they are quite happy to see crumble into dust is just juvenile.NOT one red cent is being made.We're just sharing the joy is all. Have a nice day,y'all!Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
I'm with the artists. At the moment, mechanical copyright only lasts for 50 years, and there is talk of it being extended to beyond someone's lifetime so noone else can make money out of Cliff Richard's early recordings without any money getting back to Cliff or his record company, for example.
It is true that many artists don't get much in the way of royalties (although things like Button Man come to mind which are still owned by their creators), but can you imagine, say, we reached 2020, and a company decided to reprint the Button Man stories under their own imprint because 20 years were up? That's money denied to Arthur Ransom.
As a writer, I'm never going to get much from what I write, but I don't want others to benefit at my expense unless I do something for charity.
It is true that many artists don't get much in the way of royalties (although things like Button Man come to mind which are still owned by their creators), but can you imagine, say, we reached 2020, and a company decided to reprint the Button Man stories under their own imprint because 20 years were up? That's money denied to Arthur Ransom.
As a writer, I'm never going to get much from what I write, but I don't want others to benefit at my expense unless I do something for charity.
Re: The fizzog that sunk a thousand ships - Jonah at fifty.
sorry i posted on the wrong thread, I meant to congrat Jonah .
