Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I am developing a proposal in my mind about this issue.

I propose a "pay for dsplay" o "pay for interchange" artist fee.
All work is, in principle open source. If you write a song or a painting or a Tv series or.. well whatever.

Then an public-prrivate (or whatever) enterprise tracks the number of displays which the authors do (each one can track their own work and report it if they want). In the case of internet you can count the donwloads and views rom your own free page.

This organization gets the funding from a tax in any digital and support material. All museums, books, DVD pay  the fee. So, the price of the book will be basicallya fee, the CD, DVD, hard disks will charge the fee depending on the store capacity. Museums will charge according to space.

And all the revenues will be given to the authors depending on the distribution.

So, art will be open and for free, the physical support will be charged.. and the authors will get according to their ability to get a hearing...

Open source but artitst can live.. and they do not need huge superstructures.. jsut a good group of fans..

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 08:04:32 AM EST
If I understand correctly in the UK libraries pay a fee to a clearing house that is then distributed to authors.

This is to compensate for the royalties lost because the same book is lent out to many readers.

I'm not so concerned with intangible intellectual property, like music downloads. There are enough people making or hoping to make lots of money from this so revenue capture will be worked out eventually.

I'm mostly dealing with art where the thing itself (the artifact) is thought to have value. One can sell a copy of a painting or display it online, but only one owner can actually possess the original at a time. When the value goes up through sale then the artist or a proxy should share in this gain.

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 09:55:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So why is Art a special case?  By the same logic, if I sell my car, should the car company get a share of the money?

If I sell a piece of art that someone sells on for an inflated price, then that increases the value of all future pieces of art that I produce, because a market price has been set for my work.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 09:59:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If you sell your car you'll already have made a loss on it. At best you'll break even.

If you get lucky and buy a piece by Mr Upandcoming, hold on to it for a decade or two and then sell on an upswing of popularity, you can make millions.

Worse, if your surname is Saatchi, you can define the market and use it create millions by talking up artists you happen to collect.

(Until a lot of your collection disappears in a mysterious and unexpected fire. Allegedly.)

This game is played more often than you might expect.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 10:43:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The art market is a boiler room. No different from any other scams.

The year 2000 movie 'Boiler Room' is fairly interesting on the business definition - and somewhat ahead of it's time. I got more out of it than 'Wall Street'.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 10:51:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If I understand correctly in the UK libraries pay a fee to a clearing house that is then distributed to authors.

Yes, but it's not much. When I was getting five figure royalties for book sales, the most I ever had from PLR was £800, and that was a one off. A few years of £200 was more usual.

There's a fixed PLR pot and the most popular authors walk off with most of it.

Not that I'm going to complain about getting money for nothing, but it's an approach that needs fine tuning to support less successful authors - and indeed libraries in general, which are chronically underfunded in the UK.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Jun 14th, 2009 at 10:38:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series