On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 11:44:55AM -0800, Alan wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > It was an idea invented by printers to benefit > >printers. Authors never had a say in the matter. > > > According to?
I can point you to historical sources you can read. Of course you can doubt the accuracy of those historical accounts. Not sure what I can do beyond that. I'm open to suggestions. Here's one. I got more if you wish.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worshipful_Company_of_Stationers_and_Newspaper_Makers > >Sure there are a few stars like Beatles, Stephen King and Spielberg but > >*vast majority* of creators see little if any copyright revenue! > > "Copyright revenue"? Like what? Royalties? Publishing revenue? Residuals? > "Copyright revenue" is as vague a term as "intellectual property" Like all of those! My point is true for all those examples you mentioned. > I can't speak for kplug, but I know quite a few folks who make money > from their copyrighted property. > A couple make their entire living from it, a few make enough to have a > nicer house/car/boat/whatever and most make enough for a nice dinner. What % of creators do you think fall into this category? If all copyright revenue dried up tomorrow, what % of creators would even feel an impact? I'm not denying there are a few stars. All I'm saying is that copyright isn't fueling creativity the way that one might think. Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
