ditorial

Digital Rights - The Revolution of the Arts

<< previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Alternative Models of Publishing
s more and more authors are seeking to move away from traditional publishing in order to get their work published, the market for electronic and alternative publishing methods continues to expand. The problem with the new generation of publishers is simply this: the quality and marketing capacity still cannot rival that of the traditional publishing industry. But I believe that this will eventually change as long as these new models of publishing are able to take into account that new methods must be explored in order to gain new authors an audience. This means rethinking formats, pricing guidelines, and security.

This new generation of publishers will consider the current flood of new authors within the market. There are now millions of books to choose from in digital bookstores, but when it comes to picking a new, self-published author, how will readers know who is going to be worth their time and money? Readers must still be able to rely on the fact that they will get a quality product for the money they pay. Perhaps editors, artists, graphic designers, and sites that help readers choose work based on identifying reader preferences will play a large role in the refinement of e-publishing. Most importantly will be the move to put the profits back in the hands of the artists in exchange for artists playing a larger role in the production of their work.

For authors who are willing to take on a greater role, there are a growing number of alternatives to even the current crop of e-publishers. Websites such as lulu.com (a marketplace for digital content) allow authors, as well as musicians and artists, to publish their work for free. Authors also have control over the entire process, allowing you to set your own price, receive 80% royalties from your sales, retain ownership of your copyright, and customize your own "storefront." Authors can also use Lulu to collaborate with other authors. Simply put, Lulu supplies you with the tools to publish your work immediately, free of charge, in exchange for 20% of your sales. You become the publisher. Readers may browse the site and purchase your work. However, this fact still remains: In most cases, the author is still completely responsible for the quality of their work. In order to create a new system, which allows its creators to profit from their creations, authors and artists must learn new skills or embrace new resources to capture their audience.

In addition to sites like lulu.com, which offer alternative methods of publishing, there are also alternative methods of copyrighting your work. A new term, copyleft, is now coming into the spotlight. Copyleft is a way of modifying your existing copyright to protect your right to pass on your work, and any modifications made to it, without someone else profiting financially from the alterations. Examples of this work best with software. If you write a program and want to share it with a community of programmers to see who can add to it or improve its functionality, by "copylefting" your work, you can ensure that those who make modifications to the program cannot copyright and attempt to sell the improved version for profit. All developments made to your program will remain open to the public.

But how does copyleft fit in with the writing community? At this time, it is difficult to tell what role new methods of copyright will play in the grand scheme of publishing, but these new methods do offer benefits for those engaged in collaborative efforts. Examples of copyleft projects currently active include wikipedia.org, a free, online encyclopedia, which is written and edited by its readers. Although this might initially sound like chaos, it is very well organized. Their assumption for a project such as this, where readers can freely edit, add to, and remove portions of each other's articles, is simple: They assume that the world is full of reasonable people who can work together to create a product that is better through collective contributions.

Another website that embraces this concept is the Berkman Center's Openlaw site. This website serves as an experimental, open forum for crafting legal arguments. They invite non-lawyers and lawyers alike to participate in assisting with specific cases, many dealing with digital rights and issues of copyright.

These may both serve as excellent examples of "digital communities" coming together for a productive purpose, even if there is no immediate and obvious, purely monetary gain. However, I fully believe that the more creative we become with these new technologies, the more we will be able to profit (both monetarily and as a society) through an open source approach to sharing information and creative content.

Conclusion
In this case, it is difficult to draw a definitive conclusion as to whether these open source concepts will work for the majority of authors and artists seeking to make a living from their art. This is a decision to be made by each individual, perhaps determined by their system of values and, ultimately, their intention with their work. However, as a writer, I feel strongly about the concept of creators refining our creative industry in a way that will regain the value of artistic expression. I believe that this means enhancing quality, originality, and creativity, and rejecting the principals that seem to be establishing themselves in this "superstore" generation. I also believe that this may be a revolution, which must be initiated by its artists and authors.

This article is in no way meant to condone digital theft of copyrighted material; however, I do feel it prudent to point out that there will always be those who steal movies, books, software, and music simply because they can. Still, I do not believe that the answer lies in turning our focus to ways to further limit the flow of information and creativity, while grasping tightly to soon-to-be antiquated ways of turning a profit. The role we play as artists, while embracing these new technologies, may also lie in putting our creative minds to work in advancing new ideas, business models, methods of creation, and methods of profiting from our creations.

We must find a way to create a system where the value of our work is rediscovered through the value that we, as artists, are willing to place upon it. Continuing to allow an aging industry to define our tastes, our standards, and our methods for measuring quality may only further serve to devalue our own art, as we frantically try to contort ourselves to fit into a system that may not fit to us. By breaking through the barriers of what is "traditional" in the arts, or striving for success by forging new and original pathways, we may find ourselves truly at the forefront of a revolution.

<< Previous| 1, 2, 3, 4

Written by Stephanee Killen for integrativeink.com. ©2004.
I encourage readers to share this article with others, and I welcome your comments at sk@integrativeink.com. Links to this article are also welcome. If you would like to post this article to another site, simply notify me of your intention with the web address where the article will be posted. Please be sure to include this notice in all postings.

Return to Articles