Re:Internet Archive responds to publishers’ lawsuit
by pessimizer on Thursday July 30, 2020 @01:31PM
(#24000825)
> Only in the case of independently wealthy authors, which historically typically means nobility. Most non-wealthy authors have been depending on patronage, which means some other wealthy person decide what you write.
You're mistaking publishing for writing. You need money to publish, because publishing is selling decorated paper. Or rather, you did need money to publish. Now you don't, but instead we throw up artificial barriers in order to preserve the status quo.
Re:Internet Archive responds to publishers’ lawsuit
by the_af on Thursday July 30, 2020 @12:13PM
(#23999848)
> Only in the case of independently wealthy authors, which historically typically means nobility.
Not only that. Plenty of struggling people write because they like writing. Writing is a calling which some people happen to be able to turn into a business.
But do note the post I was replying to. I wasn't arguing about copyright. I was arguing about the hyperbole of "no writer would be insane enough [...]" which is simply untrue. And it's untrue by a lot, not by a little.
> Plenty of writers have been "insane enough" to write and publish without a business model for as long as written language has existed.
Only in the case of independently wealthy authors, which historically typically means nobility. Most non-wealthy authors have been depending on patronage, which means some other wealthy person decide what you write.
Copyright was revolutionary because it meant an author could exist without catering to rich or powerful patrons.