> I don't think that Dragon Ball is unethical. I think that the authors and
publishers of Dragon Ball are doing something unethical when they restrict
people from redistributing it. That's a very important distinction.
Alright, the people behind do something unethical. However you haven't
respond to that part of my message yet. Shouldn't be avoided just because you
have a good reason to considered it unethical? (you have one, right?)
> (which is absolutely unacceptable and would likely be trademark
infringement)
As far as I know, no. It's not if you (the author) are the one who gave them
the freedom to commercially distribute your work in the first place.
> that's called competition, and it's perfectly legitimate
Oh, so you have to let everyone sell your work while you receive nothing or
else you're against competition and doing unethical things?
> As a matter of fact, people can also compete by offering gratis copies, and
that is perfectly legitimate, too.
What does that have to do with anything? The issue that we should be handling
is how are this people going to make a living while doing what they like. I
think that if you just give non-commercial distribution then you have a
chance to make money in a "pay what ever you want" system. If you don't make
money from your work at least no one else can, legally.
> It's how capitalism works. I'm sorry, but additional copies of works just
aren't that valuable in the digital age, so if multiple people have copies,
you should expect its price to quickly drop to 0.
So because you can easily make copies then the value of my work is 0?
> Artists need to find other ways to get people to pay for their work (e.g.
crowdfunding, live performances, or asking for donations)
On videogames you can't do live performances. So that's one less from 3.
Leaving us with crowfunding and donations. And with donations you would be
lucky if you get enough for the servers, food and an almost decent roof. I
haven't seen not even one game developer that made money (and a living) from
donations, so I'll be thankful if you could give some examples.
> or do their work without getting paid much and get their money somewhere
else
Do you resort to this because you recognize that it is not possible for Akira
Toriyama to make money from Dragon Ball if he put his work under CC BY-SA, so
then he has to do Drangon Ball in his free time while he get his money from
say, drawings for advertisings?
> it's the publishers who make money from copyright monopolies, not the
artists.
Videogames is kind of the exception, the developer has to get paid or else is
going to be angry (because developers can't do live performances). Still, is
true that if you team with a publisher he's the one that's going to get most
of the cake. Because people that know how to sell always get more (despite of
the quality of the product and whether the competition has a better product).
And you suggest that they should allow to freely distribute their game (even
commercially) so this will happen even without having to team up with a
publisher.
