(no subject)

[pensnest]

Am astonished to learn (via browsing at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books) that authors in the USA whose books are lent from public libraries receive *no* compensation.

Weird.

My cat is snoring. It is quite melodious.

UK popslashers - who among you is interested in visiting my Nest at the end of the month for a sparkly weekend?

Comments

[phaballa.livejournal.com]

Well, but our libraries our funded on a local level, and each library could be funded in a completely different way. THere are county systems and city systems and township systems and community systems. There's no central, federal system for funding libraries and in order to nationalize it, they'd have to pass a constitutional amendment the way they did to nationalize federal funds for roads.

Besides which, it's unconstitutional for libraries to release records of which books have been checked out, and trying to get a circulation count for each book would be next to impossible for small libraries that aren't automatized yet (ie don't have computer check out). Since I've worked at several different kinds of libraries in a couple different states, I know exactly how hard that is and how much resources it would take for a small library to count circs like that.

[carta.livejournal.com]

they'd have to pass a constitutional amendment

And thinking back on the uproar over the Patriot Act a few years ago, I can't see that happening any time soon ever.

[phaballa.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly. Librarians are fiercely protective of the right to privacy! They won't give up their names for the Patriot Act, and good for them! Of course, if they managed to nationalize the library system, the funding issues we have right now (at least in Texas) might not be as bad. But Americans are fiercely protective of their federalism, and I can't really see that happening anytime soon.

Anyway, all this is really just an argument over the difference in fair use law in the US as opposed to the UK.

[pensnest]

Federalism is another thing that we tend to fail to take into account, here; although we are, strictly speaking, four countries in one United Kingdom, we're not nearly as different (I don't think) as your states are, and things are far more likely to be done nationally. (Or possibly I see it that way because I'm English, and actually the Scots in particular have systems that are quite different in a lot of ways.)

[phaballa.livejournal.com]

Yes, every state has a different way of setting up libraries and a different method for funding them, just like every state used to have different drinking ages. The only way the federal government managed to force all 50 states to agree on 21 as the drinking age was to cut off federal funds for roads from every state that didn't comply. Otherwise they'd have had to pass a constitutional amendment that would've had to be ratified by 2/3rds of the states, and that's a very hard thing to get. It's why there aren't a lot of constitutional amendments, and most controversial policy in the US is decided by legislation, which is then challenged in the courts and either holds up or not.

And remember, it might only take a few million in the UK, but you're talking a population of 60 million compared to a population of 300 million. Our school system isn't even nationalized. It's depressing as shit :/

Anyway, as long as our fair use laws remain as they are, authors aren't going to get royalties from library book circulations beyond the initial buying of the book. The US government isn't going to justify paying for something just to be nice, and not because they *have* to.