[ SECRET POST #5561 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5561 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 32 secrets from Secret Submission Post #797.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I mean. editors and typesetters and so on need to eat as well, and your favorite books would not exist in their current form or have reached you without them. most publishing houses operate on quite thin margins. not every company is disney.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't really understand this argument. Wouldn't this logic argue against any books ever entering the public domain?

[(Anonymous)]

No?

"you have to have published a new thing in the last 70 years to have a viable business" and "it's totally fine to steal from these people" are not the same?

[(Anonymous)]

But clearly there is some point at which the logic of "editors and publishers need to eat" stops applying - because otherwise, why stop at 70 years, why not have copyrights extend ad infinitum? So it's basically an argument about where to draw the line.

[(Anonymous)]

Ayrt was not talking about the public domain at all. You inserted that in, and have been arguing against that strawman exclusively, not actually arguing against AYRT’s point.

They’re just saying that the people almost as responsible for the book existing as the author deserve to get paid for their hard work even after the author dies, as well as the author’s surviving family. Once the work enters the public domain, that’s a whole different story, and ayrt said nothing about being against the public domain. They’re just pointing out that it’s not only predatory industry higher ups that continue to benefit directly after the author has died, unlike what OP seems to think.

You’ve pointed out that something has to have gone 70 years to enter the public domain in the majority of cases, so you clearly know how the public domain works. So why do you seem to also think that a work does, or should, enter the public domain the moment it’s author dies? That’s the only way to explain how you even got the public domain from what ayrt said, because they were clearly talking about who should get money from a book shortly after the author dies, and the “until it enters the public domain” could be considered implied if you were really stretching. But “these books should never enter the public domain because the editors, typesetters and surviving family could use that money forever” was implied in no way.

[(Anonymous)]

This.

[meadowphoenix]

I think this muddles the issue. usually publishing houses doesn't necessarily have publishing rights that last as long as the copyright unless the author sold their rights completely (which makes me wonder if OP pirates when that's the case). OP could be pirating a version that was from the publishing companies who no longer have the rights, or versions for which the publishing rights have now lapsed, in which case OP isn't trangressing against those editors and typesetters.

I think your position also implies that the editors and typesetters involved in OP's favorite books would still be employed by the publishing house years after an authors death and you know, I don't think that's a reasonable premise, I think the publishing business is actually too shitty for that to be likely.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

These are several really good points! I hadn’t actually thought of it like that, but it makes sense.