XPost: rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: jimgysin@geemail.com   
      
   Frank Frank sent the following on 10/28/2009 3:36 AM:   
   > Anim8rFSK wrote:   
   >> In article ,   
   >>  Thanatos  wrote:   
   >>> In article <4ae720d6$0$1636$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,   
   >>>  Dimensional Traveler  wrote:   
   >>>> Thanatos wrote:   
   >>>>> And really, why should creative types have a fundamental right to get   
   >>>>> paid over and over again for their work forever ad infinitum while the   
   >>>>> rest of us only get paid for own work once? When a carpenter builds a   
   >>>>> house, he gets paid for the work, then moves on. He doesn't retain   
   >>>>> ownership interest in the house and get paid every time someone looks at   
   >>>>> it, uses it, lives in it, or sells it.   
   >>>> If he builds it on his own time, with materials he bought, on land he   
   >>>> owns, then yes he does retain ownership until he sells it.   
   >>> But he only gets to sell it once. He doesn't have the right to be paid   
   >>> over and over and over again for it. He doesn't retain a property right   
   >>> in the house that supersedes the rights of the people to whom he sells   
   >>> it.   
   >> He retains that right in the design.  Does your newspaper carry that   
   >> feature where you can buy house plans?  You want to build a house from   
   >> that plan, you pay a new fee.   
   >   
   > Which is just more greed and stupidity.   
      
   But you wanting the plans for free is not greed.  Heh.  Of course not.   
      
   > You get hired to design a house   
   > for someone, you should get paid for that work ONCE, by the hirer, and   
   > that's it.   
      
   And that *is* it.  No one is suggesting that the person who bought your   
   design work should have to pay for it more than once.  OTOH, if someone   
   *else* wants that design work, then *that* person has to pay for it, too.   
      
   See, here's the alternatives that such a system would lead us to.   
   Option one: people quit designing new houses, as they can't make a   
   living at it because of the freeloaders.  Option two: no new designs are   
   ever released to the public, as everyone will expect everyone *else* to   
   be the *one* person to have to pay for the new design.   
      
   And relating it to the music biz:   
      
   Option one: people quit writing new songs, as they can't make a living   
   at it because of the freeloaders.  Option two: no new songs are ever   
   released to the public, as everyone will expect everyone *else* to be   
   the *one* person to have to pay for the new song.   
      
   > You hire someone to design a house for you, you should get   
   > THE HOUSE, and that's it. In a truly free market, that WOULD be it.   
      
   No, in a truly free market, the designer and the buyer get to work out   
   whatever terms they want within the law, and third parties like the   
   Seamuses of the world don't get to presume to dictate those terms.   
      
   --   
   Jim Gysin   
   Waukesha, WI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)