2 Comments

1. Denis McGrath says:

   September 2, 2009 at 3:04 pm

   Like the Globe article,
   this frames the idea of collective licensing purely in music industry terms. ACTRA and WGC support the levy too because our challenges are fundamentally different than authors, musicians, print journalists. Nowhere on this site or anywhere else do I see any distinction from the “fair” copyright crowd about this. If anything, it’s just lazy and easy anti-corporate rhetoric.
2. Anon-K says:

   September 3, 2009 at 11:16 am

   ACTRA/WGC residuals
   @Denis. ACTRA and WGC should consider themselves seriously lucky. As a professional software developer, I get paid ONCE for the stuff that I create, by my employer. After that point, they own the IP. I do not get paid every time it is sold, I have no rights in this respect.

   In fact, many companies have a policy that anything you develop while in their employ belongs to them… So, if I were to develop something on my own time, using my own resources, they could still try to lay claim to it if they see it becoming profitable.

   Perhaps you can see why you don’t necessarily get a lot of sympathy from many people.