Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway2016a | Hacker News Reader

throwaway2016a

> 4a. To keep the rights holder honest, after they submit their estimated value, any other person may buy the copyright from them for 110% of the estimated value within 90 days.

So if my copyright is legitimately worth $1000 (because I'm not a big company, I just wrote some eBook that sells 100 copies a year) someone can steal it from me for $1100?

View on HN

More subtle; if you are willing to pay $1,000 for the renewal, then a company can buy it from you for $11,000. If you only make $100/year on it, then a company can buy it from you for $1,100, which is more than you would make in the next ten years from holding the copyright. I think the multiplier should be a little higher, or potentially you should get the right of first refusal -- if someone says "I want to steal it from you for $1,100" you can then name your price instead, and as long as you are willing to pay 10% of that price you basically get to override the attempt.

Also note that the initial copyright grant is free in this proposal; so you get 10 years of monopoly on distribution.

> Also note that the initial copyright grant is free in this proposal; so you get 10 years of monopoly on distribution.

Good point.

> If you only make $100/year on it, then a company can buy it from you for $1,100, which is more than you would make in the next ten years from holding the copyright. I

Sometimes these things are more sentimental then monetary.

Also, the way you word that, essentially it is a 10% tax on copyrighted work. Though the point about it being a 10 year monopoly is a fair one.

But doesn't this basically mean that if you only have $1,000 in your pocket, anyone with $11,000 can outbid you for your creations? You will not be able to name a price you can't literally pay right away.

Yes. I made a change above to rectify this and removed the "stealing" aspect from my proposal.

Yes, but presumably that's still a better deal than what you would have made from it yourself.

Creative works are often a labor of love not for the money.

Then why retain the copyright? Why not let others make derivative works and expand your love?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com