I am pixel-stained.

[ellenmillion]

I'm also opposed to the increasing presence in our organization of webscabs, who post their creations on the net for free. A scab is someone who works for less than union wages or on non-union terms; more broadly, a scab is someone who feathers his own nest and advances his own career by undercutting the efforts of his fellow workers to gain better pay and working conditions for all. Webscabs claim they're just posting their books for free in an attempt to market and publicize them, but to my mind they're undercutting those of us who aren't giving it away for free and are trying to get publishers to pay a better wage for our hard work.

Since more and more of SFWA is built around such electronically mediated networking and connection based venues, and more and more of our membership at least tacitly blesses the webscabs (despite the fact that they are rotting our organization from within) -- given my happily retrograde opinions, I felt I was not the president who would provide SFWAns the "net time" they seemed to want at this point in the organization's development, or who would bless the contraction of our industry toward monopoly, or who would give imprimatur to the downward spiral that is converting the noble calling of Writer into the life of Pixel-stained Technopeasant Wretch. -- Dr. Howard V. Hendrix

Happy Pixel-stained Technopeasant day!

In honor of the day, I will be a shameless webscab and post a Torn World story a bit later here. For Free. Publicly. I'm pretty sure it won't keep you from going out and buying someone else's book or undercut anyone's royalties.

Comments

[pers1stence.livejournal.com]

I'm curious if anyone's actually done scientific research about the effects of free content and the sales of more traditionally marketed/priced content in books/magazines.

And how much does that webscab earn/sale relative to the royalty/sale for the traditionally published works?

If I read a great sample of someone's work online, I know that I am more inclined to go buy their books and magazines in which their shorter work appears, but I may be an aberration. I dislike reading or watching tv/movies on a computer screen for extended periods of time, and I am a bit of a bibliophile, in love with both the medium and the message.

[mizkit.livejournal.com]

You're not an aberration. It's easier to prove with people who've got higher traffic on their sites (Cory Doctorow, Neil Gaiman), and one could argue that the simple fact that they're higher profile moves books, but Neil had AMERICAN GODS online for free for three months or something as a test run by his publisher, and it increased sales by 300%. It seems that pretty much if you post it, they will buy.

[carmensylph.livejournal.com]

I am of the opinion that people may do whatever they please with their own intellectual property!! No one has the right to tell me what I may or may not do with my art unless I willingly sign a contract stating otherwise -- so I say if a writer wants to publish his or her work at no charge to the public, then let them do so. :)

[pers1stence.livejournal.com]

Okay, well, I guess I'm not an aberration in THIS regard.... ;)

[pixiewildflower.livejournal.com]

*HUGGLES HARD* I am reading in reverse. That was a cool story.

[uminomamori.livejournal.com]

I'd be more concerned about the people doing commissioned/custom work for free or ultra cheap. A fan reading a book online is much different than a publisher getting it for free.

[laylalawlor.livejournal.com]

awww damn, I forgot about it this year! I wonder if there's anything I have around here that I could post ...