Yes, I'm interested in IP - enough, at any rate to read and comment. Partly this is because I'm a consumer who wants to be a creator, partly because some of my friends are creators. And I've just come up with a useful distinction, because I am, after all, a creator. I write my LJ, and people (for a given value of people) read it. They don't pay me, though. My mate Bill writes a blog, and people don't pay him for that. He also writes books, and people pay him for them. Up until recently, that means a publisher bought a book, or a proposal for a book, from him. They paid someone to edit it, someone to create a cover for it, someone to print it, someone to distribute it, and then someone to sell it. Then they gave Bil 10p for every pound they sold his book for. Bill stil sells some books that way. One of them is short-listed for the David Gemmell award, which makes him very happy (he is possibly the world's greatest David Gemmell fan, which is enough reason in my head for him to win the award). But now he sells most of his books as ebooks - over 10,000 over the last six or seven months. He writes a book, he makes it available to buy, and for every pound of the purchase price, he gets 70p. Which means he doesn't pay a publisher, an editor, a printer, a truck driver or a bookseller. Which is bad news for those guys, but good news for the guy creating the IP. I don't think he pays his wife to create covers for him, but he should. She's really good. He also doesn't pay an agent.
The upside of this, and the reason why IP will still make money, is that he typically publishes a new book for something between 99p and £2.99. At those prices, I'll splurge out on a book. So will tens of thousands of others. Sure, I could go to a dodgy site and download a PDF of his books (I did, to get an electronic copy of Farseer, which, despite the dedication to yours truly, is out of print). Not only does that make it possible for someone like Bill, who has a couple of dozen books behind him, to sell enough copies to make a living, it makes it possible for a would-be writer to make a return on what he writes. Not a lot - a few tens of pounds, maybe, but a hell of a lot more than I ever made submitting to Interzone and Asimov's and BBR when I was a struggling writer.
That's all very well for writers, I guess, but not so much for musicians. Here, I think you've recognised the importance of kick-starters, without putting a name to it. I paid about $25 to Lloyd Cole last year, and got a copy of his new CD (when he finished it) and a bonus CD that only went out to supporters. I've made a similar deal with Roddy Hart, and I'd do the same for a dozen or so other artists. I'd pay more to get more. And they use the money to pay producers, and session musicians, and photographers. Good stuff.
Finally, for the bigger stuff of making TV programs, I pay into a socialised collective - as a matter of fact, I pay in twice, since I need a licence for each property I live in. The BBC worked well from that model, but it remains to be seen if they will be allowed to continue doing that, since they don't make a profit for anyone, which is of course a sin. And what socialism means. Or is it opera that's defined as something that doesn't make money?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-04-11 06:56 pm (UTC)And I've just come up with a useful distinction, because I am, after all, a creator. I write my LJ, and people (for a given value of people) read it. They don't pay me, though. My mate Bill writes a blog, and people don't pay him for that. He also writes books, and people pay him for them.
Up until recently, that means a publisher bought a book, or a proposal for a book, from him. They paid someone to edit it, someone to create a cover for it, someone to print it, someone to distribute it, and then someone to sell it. Then they gave Bil 10p for every pound they sold his book for.
Bill stil sells some books that way. One of them is short-listed for the David Gemmell award, which makes him very happy (he is possibly the world's greatest David Gemmell fan, which is enough reason in my head for him to win the award).
But now he sells most of his books as ebooks - over 10,000 over the last six or seven months. He writes a book, he makes it available to buy, and for every pound of the purchase price, he gets 70p. Which means he doesn't pay a publisher, an editor, a printer, a truck driver or a bookseller. Which is bad news for those guys, but good news for the guy creating the IP. I don't think he pays his wife to create covers for him, but he should. She's really good. He also doesn't pay an agent.
The upside of this, and the reason why IP will still make money, is that he typically publishes a new book for something between 99p and £2.99. At those prices, I'll splurge out on a book. So will tens of thousands of others. Sure, I could go to a dodgy site and download a PDF of his books (I did, to get an electronic copy of Farseer, which, despite the dedication to yours truly, is out of print). Not only does that make it possible for someone like Bill, who has a couple of dozen books behind him, to sell enough copies to make a living, it makes it possible for a would-be writer to make a return on what he writes. Not a lot - a few tens of pounds, maybe, but a hell of a lot more than I ever made submitting to Interzone and Asimov's and BBR when I was a struggling writer.
That's all very well for writers, I guess, but not so much for musicians. Here, I think you've recognised the importance of kick-starters, without putting a name to it. I paid about $25 to Lloyd Cole last year, and got a copy of his new CD (when he finished it) and a bonus CD that only went out to supporters. I've made a similar deal with Roddy Hart, and I'd do the same for a dozen or so other artists. I'd pay more to get more. And they use the money to pay producers, and session musicians, and photographers. Good stuff.
Finally, for the bigger stuff of making TV programs, I pay into a socialised collective - as a matter of fact, I pay in twice, since I need a licence for each property I live in. The BBC worked well from that model, but it remains to be seen if they will be allowed to continue doing that, since they don't make a profit for anyone, which is of course a sin. And what socialism means. Or is it opera that's defined as something that doesn't make money?
I'll get my coat...