<i>"But it’s an unfortunate fact that there have never been, and I ultimately realized there never will be, any royalties paid to the people who write or draw or otherwise create all the Disney comics you’ve ever read."</i><p>Please remember the above quote next time you hear some corporate puppet bring up the "starving artist" argument in a copyright policy debate.
This guy's history speaks volumes about success and being good at something.<p>People who want to get into Software business because of money and people who want to learn how to play the guitar because of popularity have one thing in common: they only envision the outcome. They daydream of sitting on a load of cash or being surrounded by friends (and girls) when playing a tune.<p>People who get really successful at something enjoy the freaking process. Most of the times (if not all) they don't even realize they are heading for success: they are too busy enjoying the improvement of their craft.
I grew up reading Don's comics, and my D.U.C.K. book is so worn that it doesn't have a cover anymore. Hell, in my old room I still have his (wonderfully and finely detailed, as usual) Duck genealogical tree poster. Despite all this, I knew nothing about the man himself, which - judging from this heartfelt article - is as good and intelligent as his comics. It's sad to see he stopped writing, mostly because there's no one there to fill his gap -- and it's a huge gap, as huge as those left by Floyd Gottfredson and Carl Barks.
I might not understand the complaint here. I don't get paid royalties on the software I write either, because my employer owns the copyright to my work. That licensing arrangement suits both of us because I would like to collect a salary without assuming the risk that my work won't be profitable. It's not an exploitive relationship.
This article is a good example of why I don't buy non-creator owned comics (aside from the fact that I view Marvel and DC comics from 1990-on to be pure shit). I know most comic fans don't give a shit but I do.
Wow I never expected to see an article about Don Rosa in HN. This is a really sad turn of events which I was not aware of. I grew up with Carl Barks's and Don Rosa's comics and thoroughly enjoyed each one of their stories, was inspired and moved by them. He leaves some pretty big shoes to be filled.<p>Thank you Don, for everything you have done and for being with me through all my childhood( and beyond) through your stories
btw, advice to anyone who experiences it, if you think your retina is detaching, SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY. (If that wasn't obvious from the article.)
It seems it all boils down to this: he didn't make as much money as he wanted.<p>I don't want to trivialize the issue: making money is not easy, but the guy over-plays the victim card.<p>He seems to be a successful artist. He quits and it's all a fault of <i>other</i> people, who don't pay him as much as he deserves.<p>Again, not to trivialize the issue, but an artist with a lot of fans should be able to find a way to make money.<p>Did he try to follow the steps of many cartoonists that make decent money doing daily cartoons on the web, like theotmealguy?<p>Did he try to create anything outside of work-for-hire arrangement that he entered (willingly, as a consenting adult) into with Disney?<p>No evidence of that.<p>According to him, it's just the system conspires against poor artist.<p>According to me, he's just a lousy businessman who lacks awareness of his own shortcomings and oblivious to many ways he could have made money with his art. Instead he chose a safe route of employment and as an adult he should understand that it also usually comes with limited upside.<p>If he wanted a bigger upside, he should have taken more risks.