[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: SV: Knight and Public Domain
"No one wants to rip off his heirs but profiting from
something you didn't help create 70 plus years after
the death of he who did create it is ridiculously
excessive. Ten years would be reasonable. "
Whoa, I don't know where to begin with that one. That is how
artists make money. That is our bank account and our savings. That
is our STOCK in the future.
Thats like saying someone who bought stock in a company ten years ago
for the betterment of his family should be payed out and left to
reinvest. It is hard enough trying to make money as an artist to have
that to deal with.
I'd be lucky to have something that earns money for 10 weeks
regardless of 10 years. Hell, its a battle to own the very artwork
you created out of a lifetime of learning. I own almost NOTHING of
what I've produced and rarely will anyone ever see it....and I need to
pay the taxes on it. Knight is our Getty, and his family should reap
the benifits and be proud to be part of that heritage for a long
time. Why do we work if its not for the betterment of our family's.
David Krentz
On May 15, 2008, at 8:09 PM, Andrew Simpson wrote: