[LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such

[Paul Davis]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:29 AM, drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> wrote:

>
>
> One would presumably not release the work to the public until one had
> gotten a
> fair return on one's labour.


that implies only a private audience (and one contract-bound to not "leak"
the work) until one reached whatever one deemed a fair return.

which in turn implies the notion that to get a larger return requires a
public release that (in what I perceive as your worldview) in turn implies
abandoment of any ability to restrict access to or use of one's work (even
though one might still get paid something for it).

effectively, you're arguing for "if you don't have a rich patron and you
expect the public to pay for your work, you must give up any control over
your work, in the hope that the public will pay you for it anyway".

given that most rich patrons want/need public distribution of the work you
do for them (think hollywood), i have a hard time understanding how this is
not tantamount to saying "if you want to get paid anything for your work,
you must give up all control over it".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20130213/d440136c/attachment.html>