Hacker News Reader

I have to agree. This hurt authors everywhere and authors can't allow this kind of precedent to take hold or authors can't afford to eat. Nor can readers, really because without well-fed authors, there's nothing to read.

View on HN

There were definitely authors before copyright existed.

I for one can't wait to return to a time where the only people who could afford to be writers were members of the upper class who didn't need to rely on publishing for their income; we might be spared the next Dan Brown.

It's no wonder copyright reform has completely stalled out over the last 20 years when all discussions devolve into the same repeated canards.

If you're one of the majority of writers and relying on publishing for your income, you are probably not relying on publishing for your income but rather food stamps.

Publishers aren't really on authors' sides.

Many authors are their own publishers. Writing (and most arts) pays so little because society values their work so little. We seem to value a decent novel at about $5. An author already sees about $0.50-$1 of that. Respected, well reviewed, award winning (but not best selling) authors I know would still be hard up earning a living wage even if their income increased tenfold by them getting 100% of the proceeds.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com