CCBC-Net Archives
misc. comments re: credit for editors and Dear Genuis
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Violet J. Harris <vjharris>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 16:20:51 -0600
Hello:
I tried to send this message last week but experienced some computer difficulties. I was quite interested in the comments about Dear Genuis. I haven't had a chance to read my copy yet so I can't comment on the contents with one exception. In skimming the introduction, I noted that Ursula Nordstrom had a "companion." Is companion being used in the sense of one who was an employee/friend or lover?
I hate to introduce a bit of crass commercialism in the discussion about credit for editors but here goes. Given the litigious nature of society, might we envision legal wrangles about ownership of "intellectual property," especially if royalties become an issue or ownership of coypright? A few years ago, one illustrator/author made the point that contracts for illustrators might include a clause for royalties if the book was awarded the Caldecott Medal. Similarly, many women, and some men, argue that they make significant contributions to their spouses' career and should be compensated in the event of a divorce. Are there possible parallels here or does the nature of the work-artistic creation-preclude such argument?
Received on Tue 18 Aug 1998 05:20:51 PM CDT
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 16:20:51 -0600
Hello:
I tried to send this message last week but experienced some computer difficulties. I was quite interested in the comments about Dear Genuis. I haven't had a chance to read my copy yet so I can't comment on the contents with one exception. In skimming the introduction, I noted that Ursula Nordstrom had a "companion." Is companion being used in the sense of one who was an employee/friend or lover?
I hate to introduce a bit of crass commercialism in the discussion about credit for editors but here goes. Given the litigious nature of society, might we envision legal wrangles about ownership of "intellectual property," especially if royalties become an issue or ownership of coypright? A few years ago, one illustrator/author made the point that contracts for illustrators might include a clause for royalties if the book was awarded the Caldecott Medal. Similarly, many women, and some men, argue that they make significant contributions to their spouses' career and should be compensated in the event of a divorce. Are there possible parallels here or does the nature of the work-artistic creation-preclude such argument?
Received on Tue 18 Aug 1998 05:20:51 PM CDT
