vinay87 Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 (edited) I've always wondered whether it'd be possible to write my books off as under the public domain and therefore uploadable to Project Gutenburg in my will. OK So I'm only 22 and unpublished. Yet. Many books are in the hands of the corporates. Classics of fiction that should be free are being released with various connotations and notes and for that we end up paying a lot. But while some publishers charge a very little amount (Wordsworth) for the books, others (Penguin) charge absymal amounts for books without living authors. I just can't understand the logic that'd say that there intellectual property of a father should pass on to the children either. Unless of course, said child is milking the work for what it's worth in the manner of sequels. *cough*Christopher*cough*Tolkien*cough*. Same goes for music and art. Why should we pay bigshot companies for the classics that no one is getting any royalties for? Think about it, as a writer, the first reason to write should be to be read. And charging money for it only comes so that the writer will be able to write more. (Don't go looking at Rowling, she doesn't count till she releases more books.) If the writer didn't need the money, then the books should be free! If there is a way to make my books free post my death I will. Of course companies should still be allowed to print the books and sell them, we wouldn't have leather bound books if left to ourselves. (gasp! Yes Giulia, I know you're almost fainting at the thought) But if some people enjoy reading the ebooks, then they should be allowed to. Or to print it and get it bound themselves. I hope all this just doesn't seem like immature ramblings though. Edited February 13, 2010 by vinay87 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexiepiper Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 I can definitely see where you're coming from and have voted yes, but like you say most free books are only classics which have been around for a longggg time, so I don't think it'll ever happen with modern releases because people want to pass their rights down to children etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 Good points Vinay. I have never thought about it before. I think they should be free after say 50 years after the author's demise. so I voted no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinay87 Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 Good points Vinay. I have never thought about it before. I think they should be free after say 50 years after the author's demise. so I voted no. I think they're currently so 75 years after the writer's death. I can definitely see where you're coming from and have voted yes, but like you say most free books are only classics which have been around for a longggg time, so I don't think it'll ever happen with modern releases because people want to pass their rights down to children etc That' makes sense. Yet seems unfair when certain heirs just choose to disobey the author's decision and do stuff like sign movie rights or write sequels just to milk the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexiepiper Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 I completely agree, but I suppost unless they stipulate such things in their wills, then they own the right to do as they please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BookJumper Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 No more leather-bound books?! *screams and faints* *gets up again* It's a tricky one. On one hand, I'm not in this field to make money (earning enough to continue writing would suit me fine - which is why I want to be the first person to win the Booker with a work of Speculative Fiction; then I'll have enough pennies to see me through the next five or so years of writing) and would love for my work to be as accessible as possible. On the other hand, a book for me is the blessed union of words, typeface, carefully laid out margins, pictures, binding, cover etc. etc. etc.; anyone downloading and printing a book themselves would only have the words. On a third hand, it's only natural for a parent to want to look after and be able to provide for their family even after they're gone. I see nothing wrong with wanting your children to benefit from your hard work - benefiting being different from speculating, so specific rules about movies and sequels and the like are going to be nigglingly set down in my will. So my answer is a resounding, 'I don't know.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinay87 Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 It just feels odd, that's all. I mean some authors are against movies and stuff. What would happen if JD Salinger's family decides to allow people to write a biography about him?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 But while some publishers charge a very little amount (Wordsworth) for the books, others (Penguin) charge absymal amounts for books without living authors. The difference between the two, though, is that the Wordsworth classics are just straight re-prints, whereas Penguin books are often furnished with new material (introductions and analysis that help to put a book in context; to explain the themes in it and how it came to be written etc). Personally, I always go for the Penguin version of a book precisely for this extra content - I don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arewenearlythere Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 I believe that stories should become public domain eventually. It just adds to creative flow when Intellectual property is public and no longer copyrighted. I work for Bayard Books and we have an Alice's Adventures in Wonderland edition out in March to coincide with the film, If the Alice in Wonderland was not in public domain we wouldn't be able to bring the story to new audiences and help the fairytale live on. As long as the book is handled tastefully once it is public domain i.e. Disney with The Little Mermaid and Sleeping Beauty, I don't think it is a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigWords Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 It isn't just a question of privately held vs. public domain, because trademark also comes into play - a book can be in the public domain whilst elements are still under trademark. Creative Commons is also a way to open the work into a nearly public domain status, but it has its' drawbacks as far as using the material later on... There have been several "I'm granting this to the public domain" acts by various authors over the years, and sometimes publishers step in to inform the author that, no, sorry, you can't do that. It really is an entirely labyrinthine issue, which only becomes more complex the deeper you delve into it. The laws which govern copyright were never designed for the portability of electronic documents, and so the way in which we read books today is - pretty much - an entirely new field of law. There are laws being propped up by assumed rights, unrelated legislature being co-opted to provide framework for untested media, and many other quirks which have slipped into the current intellectual property protection. Even a simplified list of what you can, can't and might be able to do contradicts itself an ungodly number of times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.