RE: Supremes rule for freelancers

Subject: RE: Supremes rule for freelancers
From: "Kathy E. Gill" <techwriter -at- cyberwriter -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 10:20:45 -0700

At 11:49 AM -0500 6/25/01, bryan -dot- westbrook -at- amd -dot- com wrote:

I predict that we will see a lot more articles pulled from the net all
together than we will see free-lance writers receiving royalty checks (not
counting, of course, the court-mandated back royalties).

First, this is not just 'the Net"-- it includes CD based databases/publishing.

Second, I believe this means that future contracts with freelancers -- photographers included -- will be more specific as to which rights are being purchased or leased.

Most major media (I believe all of those cited) already have pay-per-view for archived material. Yes, it might cause a burp in their negotiations with authors of older material -- but it need not be "the death" of content on the Net from a financial blow.



*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at or info -at- devahelp -dot- com

Sponsored by Cub Lea, specialist in low-cost outsourced development
and documentation. Overload and time-sensitive jobs at exceptional
rates. Unique free gifts for all visitors to

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


RE: Supremes rule for freelancers: From: bryan . westbrook

Previous by Author: more on supremes ruling
Next by Author: RE: Supremes rule for freelancers
Previous by Thread: RE: Supremes rule for freelancers
Next by Thread: RE: Supremes rule for freelancers

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads