# The other kind of pirate.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [July 23, 2006, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684 "2006-07-23T06:29:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2006, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684/121 "2006-08-12T04:50:05Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=Mr2001]  
Then I suggest you raise your standards, sir.  
[/quote]

So how do you propose that money is made out of books then? I think the actual problem lies in _dropping my standards_ to include harebrained schemes that even you admit won’t work.

[QUOTE=Mr2001]  
There’s still an incentive: cold hard cash.  
[/QUOTE]

What cold hard cash? You are yet to come up with a model that doesn’t result in large amounts of present IP vanishing due to lack of funding.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2006, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684/122 "2006-08-12T22:52:08Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=Princhester]  
So how do you propose that money is made out of books then?  
[/quote]

Like I said: the same way I proposed for software and music in this very thread. I’m not explaining it again just for you.

> [@](#):
>
> What cold hard cash?

Read the context for that statement–for example, the sentence that came right after it, which you clipped out of the quote–and you’ll see that we were talking about a compulsory license system under which authors would be paid royalties when their work is distributed or built into derivative works (but wouldn’t have veto power over such use).

> [@](#):
>
> You are yet to come up with a model that doesn’t result in large amounts of present IP vanishing due to lack of funding.

Again, my goal is to give the public back the rights that copyright law has taken away, not to ensure that all forms of artistic endeavor are funded at today’s levels. But even you must agree that moving to compulsory licensing wouldn’t have nearly the same effect on the funding process as my first proposal (the “demand pool” - thanks, **JRD** ).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\
**Post date:** [August 13, 2006, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684/123 "2006-08-13T11:27:16Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=Mr2001]  
Like I said: the same way I proposed for software and music in this very thread. I’m not explaining it again just for you.  
[/quote]

Is this the scheme you set out in post #89?

> [@](#):
>
> Read the context for that statement–for example, the sentence that came right after it, which you clipped out of the quote–and you’ll see that we were talking about a compulsory license system under which authors would be paid royalties when their work is distributed or built into derivative works (but wouldn’t have veto power over such use).

OK, missed that. Sorry. I’ll try to keep up.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-other-kind-of-pirate/365684.md?page=6)