pdf's of Raymond Franz's books

by Newly Enlightened 277 Replies latest members private

  • Simon
    Simon

    That works for certain things but for some creative works there is no one offering enough money in one chunk upfront to make it worthwhile. Not that people only seek profit but people have to eat ultimately.

    The work takes time and energy, often hard costs as well. These can be offset but spread over a number of years. It's just a different model but without it we wouldn't have some of the works we have today.

    Take software for instance where both can happen - I can be paid to write an application and boom, done, money in the bank. Alternatively I can have a share in the proceeds - I invest my time and energy for no immediate payback but eventually the ongoing revenue makes it worthwhile.

    Same with photography - you can be commissioned to take pictures (e.g. weddings) or you can go round taking pictures and hoping to sell them as stock images and over time generate revenue so you can keep doing it and paying for equipment etc...

    Without copyright you won't have many creative works.

    I work for my money, and an artist deserves money for his work too. The earnings of my work of today are however limited. My boss doesn't pay me next year for the work I do today

    But you likely get paid substantially more *today* vs someone who's earnings are spread over possibly decades. It's not like they are being paid your salary over and over. They rely on the protection of copyright to provide the earnings for the time and effort they invested.

  • 1009
    1009

    So, that's why I said "it should respect the makers work and guarantee a reasonable income for the maker". It might be hard to establish what is reasonable. But especially in the music and movie industries the profits are unreasonably huge, and not just for the artists.

    'Without copyright you won't have many creative works.' That is nonsense. For centuries we have had creative works. People payed painters for paintings, architects for buildings, sculptors for sculptures, musicians to make music. We even had books. And all without the copyrights!

  • the girl next door
    the girl next door
    I wonder how George Lucas would weigh in on this subject?
  • 1009
    1009

    George Lucas... Net worth US$5.1 billion.

    My example would be more like Alexander Fleming who made sure that penicillin was freely available in stead of claiming a patent to earn US$5.1 billion.

    Now, I don't say George Lucas or any other artist doesn't deserve to be rich. But common, US$5.1 billion is a little bit out of proportion...

    Neither am I opposed to copyrights. I just believe the current system is outdated and should be reinvented.

    Back to CoC. Since your only argument in favor of copyrights seems to be that the maker needs to make a living (with which I agree until a certain level), and Franz doesn't live anymore... What are currently the benefits of having copyrighted CoC? I have no idea.

    And on the other hand: what would be the benefits if the copyrights were lifted? We all know how CoC has helped us, and it can help many others.

  • Simon
    Simon
    But especially in the music and movie industries the profits are unreasonably huge, and not just for the artists.

    No, they are not. Sure, they are for some, the big big stars ... but most people make very little if anything.

    You are pointing at the pinnacles of success and then saying "all people in this profession make too much".

    Since your only argument in favor of copyrights seems to be that the maker needs to make a living (with which I agree until a certain level), and Franz doesn't live anymore... What are currently the benefits of having copyrighted CoC? I have no idea.

    Franz has the right to leave his assets to whoever he wants. When you die do you want to leave money you earned to your children or family? Why should you be allowed to if you're dead?

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat
    Does anyone have the thought: if Ray Franz really cared about his books helping people, he would,have made arrangements for them to remain in print?
  • steve2
    steve2

    Jonathan you keep saying you're "done" with responding and now have upped the ante by saying you're 'seriously done'with responding. But you keep responding.

    It's perfectly okay to respond and keep responding, or to not respond as the case may be - without the need to announce whether you're done. On that note, I'm done...I think.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    I would like to offer this Deborah $8000 US for the rights to both books. Maybe she's got much better offers already, or she's already given the rights away. If not please tell her that's my offer. (In case there's any doubt I am serious about this)

  • blondie
    blondie
    Who is Deborah, SBF?
  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat
    Isn't she the one who owns the rights?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit