Question for the author community

[KeithD]

Well, if it was worse in the past I'll just count my blessings that things have improved, even if it is borderline hysterical at times.

Yep, you and me both. Trying to save authors from themselves on these points has been frustrating.

 

[KeithD]

No, YOU can't.

Some can. Quit projecting. This is not a legal issue at all, for many of us. It's an ethical one.

The people who bring it up and have to be helped out on it don't often see a separation--in fact, a lot of them act like the ethics are only for their benefit, not something they should consider for others.

Hope you're able to get that burr out of your ass that made you post that comment.

 

[SimonDoom]

I wasn't talking about the legal aspects of the issue.
More the way people here are highly emotional and over protective when it comes to this kind of thing.
Throwing around emotionally charged words like "feeling violated" over copyright issues.

That doesn't strike me as "highly emotional" or "over protective." It strikes me as normal for an author. Authors, or at least many, many of them, naturally feel a keen proprietary sense for their creations. They don't want to see them used without their permission. That doesn't seem weird to me, any more than it would seem weird if a homeowner felt violated after they'd returned from a vacation and squatters had taken over their home.

Copyright is a matter of law, not ethics, but its rules have become so deeply absorbed that I think for many artists and authors it's become a deeply held ethical matter as well. When you consider the deep personal investment people have in their creations, it makes sense to me.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

That doesn't strike me as "highly emotional" or "over protective." It strikes me as normal for an author. Authors, or at least many, many of them, naturally feel a keen proprietary sense for their creations. They don't want to see them used without their permission. That doesn't seem weird to me, any more than it would seem weird if a homeowner felt violated after they'd returned from a vacation and squatters had taken over their home.

Copyright is a matter of law, not ethics, but its rules have become so deeply absorbed that I think for many artists and authors it's become a deeply held ethical matter as well. When you consider the deep personal investment people have in their creations, it makes sense to me.

Well, I suppose I just see a difference between people using my home, my private sanctuary from the world, and a story that I freely released into the world.

From my perspective a better analogy would be someone hanging out in my unfenced front yard.
They are on my property, and I'd certainly they rather not be there, but they aren't harming me, and I certainly haven't been violated.

 

[KeithD]

People get shot in the United States for walking onto unfenced private front yards.

I do think that anyone who gets highly emotional about the use of something they've written shouldn't be posting it to a free-access Internet site.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

People get shot in the United States for walking onto unfenced private front yards.

I do think that anyone who gets highly emotional about the use of something they've written shouldn't be posting it to a free-access Internet site.

An exceedingly rare event, and society rightly condemns (both morraly and legally) the shooter in those cases.

 

[BrokenSpokes]

Without trying to hijack this, I have another question on which I’d be interested to get fellow authors’ opinions.

I submitted an entry to the Nude Day event, a story which is the fifth in a series. To me, each stands alone, meaning each can be read on its own, that unlike chapters in a book, it is not necessary to have read earlier ones for it to make sense.

Not offended, but pretty amazed at how effectively this single question actually completely derailed my thread for three pages of unrelated comments, lol

 

[Bramblethorn]

Is there evidence that supports the idea that to win contests authors must please the "average" reader/voter?

I don't know, but I don't see that, and my perception is to the contrary.

It's not what the contest voting system implies, no.

If the win condition were "highest average score" then by definition, the winner would be the story that does best at pleasing the average reader.

But the actual win condition is getting most votes in a poll where each reader gets to vote for just one story. A story that's loved by 1/3 of the voters and hated by the rest will do better than one that's everybody's second choice.