At its outset, American copyright provided for 14 years of exclusivity, renewable for another 14 years by the author, but - crucially - not by the publisher. This was a shrewd move by the US Framers, because it meant the publisher had to convince the author to file paperwork.
1/
If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Most authors have very little bargaining leverage at the outset of their publishing deals, and even when the author's prior accomplishments afford them some bargaining power, a new book is, by definition, an unknown quantity, and the fair price for it is debatable.
3/
This week on my podcast, I read my latest @Medium column, "Self-Publishing," an essay about the structural shifts in the publishing industry over the past half-century and how and why that has driven people to try self-publishing.
If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
The tale starts with the rise of Big Box stores, after Reagan's deregulation got Sam Walton to take Walmart national. This concentrated the "mass market" - the huge, variegated world of pharmacy and grocery and cornerstore spinner racks that were the cradle of genre fiction.
2/
When we talk about conspiratorialism, we tend to focus (naturally) on the content of the conspiracy. Not only are those stories entertainingly outlandish - they're also the point of contact between conspiracists and the world.
1/
If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
If your mom is shouting about "Hollywood pedos," it's natural that you'll end up discussing the relationship of this belief to observable reality. But while the content of conspiratorial beliefs gets lots of attention, we tend to neglect the SIGNIFICANCE of those beliefs.
3/
When @mkapor articulated the principle that "architecture is politics" at the founding of @EFF, he was charging technologists with the moral duty to contemplate the kinds of social interactions their technological decisions would facilitate - and prohibit.
1/
If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
At question was nothing less than the character of the networked society. Would the vast, pluripotent, general purpose, interconnected network serve as a glorified video-on-demand service, the world's greatest pornography distribution system, a giant high-tech mall?
3/