Page:Culture.vs.Copyright 01.pdf/118

 * On the other hand, even within Self-tuning, an author’s name is protected at least twice. First, unwritten, academic-like standards for attribution have to emerge. Second, it is in the publisher’s best interest to attribute a work to its known author. Theft may occur, as discussed, at the very first public appearance of an author’s work. However, this is not profitable in the long run because the author’s name becomes a stamp of quality. If, nonetheless, theft does happen, there are certain protections which are even more effective than copyright law. Needless to say, the same mechanisms work under Authoright.
 * Under Authoright, as under Self-tuning, the more talented and unique an author is, the more he gets promoted. On the contrary, under copyright the author is pushed to follow best-selling examples, that is to say, to plagiarize.
 * Under Authoright, as under Self-tuning, an author is not limited in learning from others. On the contrary, under copyright, an author cannot freely learn and build upon the works of others. He is pushed to artistic naivety.
 * Under both copyright and Authoright, an author can legally protect his name. Under Self-tuning, however, he has to use nonspecific laws. This feature does not amount to a considerable advantage for Authoright; the author can just more easily protect his name. As I said earlier, it is likely that unwritten self-enforced rules will emerge as they have in academia. This feature may, however, become significant during the shift to Authoright because of more than three hundred years of total disrespect for authorship fueled by copyright.
 * Under Authoright, as with Self-tuning, if a publisher steals an author’s work, the author can still compete with the thief. On the contrary, under copyright, a work, if stolen and not recovered in the courts, is lost forever.
 * As under Self-tuning, under Authoright, markets are flooded with works of art along a spectrum of content, quality, and price. Under