Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don Rosa: Why I Quit

career-end.donrosa.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#41

Post by pimeys »

pmelendez wrote: post #9
zeitg3ist wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you read his article very well. He doesn't give a shit about making money. He's just pointing out that in the Disney comic system there are no royalties and artists get exploited.

I don't think this is particular to the Disney comic. How many game developers are being paid proportionally with sales? Usually sales and marketing people are the ones with those benefits, not the content generators. On a flip side, is not like they invest any money on the final product as they are generally being paid as a regular job.

How many game developers do everything in the game and then get their game marketed in his/her own name. Then people would buy a lot of copies because of the name and the original author will not get anything.

You have to remember, selling a duck comic carrying the names of Carl Barks and Don Rosa is a very big business here in Europe. The comic's don't sell because of Disney, because of the ducks themselves. People adore those two gentleman.

And they don't get anything out of it.

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#42

Post by pimeys »

pimeys wrote: post #40
zeitg3ist wrote: post #4

I grew up reading Don's comics, and my D.U.C.K. book is so worn that it doesn't have a cover anymore. Hell, in my old room I still have his (wonderfully and finely detailed, as usual) Duck genealogical tree poster. Despite all this, I knew nothing about the man himself, which - judging from this heartfelt article - is as good and intelligent as his comics. It's sad to see he stopped writing, mostly because there's no…

I also own every duck book he ever released. I grew up with his and Carl Barks' comics. I still enjoy them. Btw, Don Rosa and Carl Barks are almost like national heroes in Finland where I grew up. When Carl Barks visited the country, there were people on the streets celebrating. Don Rosa's visits are also a big thing.

Here's a video from 1994 when Carl Barks had his first visit in Helsinki. The streets were full of people celebrating. He was kind of a rock star in the country.

http://yle.fi/elavaarkisto/artikkelit/carl_barks_suomessa_14...

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#43

Post by njharman »

skymt wrote: post #16
praptak wrote: post #11

"But it’s an unfortunate fact that there have never been, and I ultimately realized there never will be, any royalties paid to the people who write or draw or otherwise create all the Disney comics you’ve ever read." Please remember the above quote next time you hear some corporate puppet bring up the "starving artist" argument in a copyright policy debate.

Don't frame it like that. It's dishonest. Corporations withholding royalties from artists is obviously bad . But it's entirely consistent to condemn such abuse while still supporting the idea that artists ought to be repaid for their work.

Tool. The corporate stooge has already framed it, dishonestly so. Using "starving artists" to argue increased control and ownership for corporations.

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#44

Post by njharman »

snowwrestler wrote: post #25
drcube wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it highlights the hypocrisy of the largest anti-sharing organization. Movie studios and record labels are also generally lousy to the talent they make their money off of. Treating creators like shit while outwardly pretending to care about them to advance your business interests makes your whole side look bad.

When we talk about copyright policy, or enforcement, the effects are not limited to the big rich companies that it is easy to hate. There are plenty of artist-friendly, or artist-owned, labels and distributions companies, and they are also hurt by piracy. In fact I would argue they are hurt more than the big labels, because each individual missed sale is a bigger percentage of their total revenue.

Where's your proof those are hurt more or at all by piracy? I've seen just the opposite, sharing increasing sales/revenue.

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#45

Post by njharman »

thurn wrote: post #15

I might not understand the complaint here. I don't get paid royalties on the software I write either, because my employer owns the copyright to my work. That licensing arrangement suits both of us because I would like to collect a salary without assuming the risk that my work won't be profitable. It's not an exploitive relationship.

Its not hard to understand. You are NOTHING like an artist.

Is your name used to promote work?

Do you have to go on promotional tours to show your face / drum up sales?

Is your work unique, no it's not. You can easily be replaced. You have a skill. Artist has talent and popularity. They could find another artist. Not easily and not with the fame and following and thus profitability of existing artist.

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#46

Post by Evbn »

snowwrestler wrote: post #30
MichaelGG wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering people buy for convenience or to support the artist, I'd say a small label benefits more from piracy. The big labels with extensive marketing are going to gain less fans from piracy. While I might torrent a well-known group to try it out, chances are I'm already acquainted. Whereas with a small group, pirating a torrent of stuff might be a way I actually discover an artist. I know I've downloaded big "mix…

I would encourage you to try talking to people who actually own and operate small and midsize labels. The effect of piracy is clearly visible in their sales charts; but based on the cultural treatment of it, they consider it a cost of maintaining good relations with their fans. Their fans are hurting them, but since they like their fans, they struggle to find a way to make up the difference somehow. Piracy is a good…

How is it clearly visible? And why are you talking about labels, not artists?

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#47

Post by Evbn »

milfot wrote: post #35
crazygringo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Once you get into understanding how investors, investment and VC, etc. work, the mathematics of risk and payoff become very clear. If you, as an investor, are throwing millions of dollars into a product that requires millions of dollars, and has only a 10% chance of success, then you a commensurate share of the payoff as well, which may even be most of it. At my last job, I got to choose the balance betwe…

Absolutely! I agree with your whole post. I was meaning 'usually' in the sense of usual employer / employee relationships. Most employee's do not know, nor know how to find out, their net worth to the company. They definitely do not get offered equity. Most companies go to some lengths to obfuscate the earnings from their employees and contractually forbid their employees from speaking about their own earnings. Most…

You don't need great value, you just need two prospective buyers to compete.

Re: Don Rosa: Why I Quit

#48

Post by Evbn »

njharman wrote: post #45
thurn wrote: post #15

I might not understand the complaint here. I don't get paid royalties on the software I write either, because my employer owns the copyright to my work. That licensing arrangement suits both of us because I would like to collect a salary without assuming the risk that my work won't be profitable. It's not an exploitive relationship.

Its not hard to understand. You are NOTHING like an artist. Is your name used to promote work? Do you have to go on promotional tours to show your face / drum up sales? Is your work unique, no it's not. You can easily be replaced. You have a skill. Artist has talent and popularity. They could find another artist. Not easily and not with the fame and following and thus profitability of existing artist.

You seem to be conflating "artist" with "spokesmodel". Is Britney Spears the artist on her records? Only one part of many.
Post reply on HN