The ability to change features, prices, and availability of things you’ve already paid for is a powerful temptation to corporations.

  • ominouslemon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    This only applies to cases where the artist/actor/whatever gets paid upfront. Most of the times, that does not happen. The creator of something only gets money when somebody buys what they have created (books, videogames, music, etc)

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Even if they were paid upfront, they were paid off the idea that the company could make bank on their (ready yourself for the word in case it triggers): Intellectual Property.

      In a future world where people have achieved their wish and the concept no longer exists, companies have no reason to pay creators ahead of time.

    • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I can get that they’d not necessarily be paid upfront, but there is no possible legal contract in which they are to be paid only in the future, in causality, according to the performance of a ~~third~ ~ fourth party who is not in the contract. What, are the actors paying their weekly groceries with IOUs?

      • ominouslemon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Every artist in every field get MAYBE paid a tiny bit upfront, and then a percentage of the sales. That’s how books and music work, for instance