John, now I'm curious-- are you open to trying some sort of model where people fund the writing of your next book in advance, instead of after the fact? I'm willing to bet that if you got enough publicity, you could possibly get more with that sort of system than you do book royalties currently... I'd chip in $10 or so, which I bet is more than the royalty you get on a paper copy of one of your books.
Yes, and in a way I've already been the beneficiary of such largesse on a grand scale, though it's not really about me. It's just that I can only speak about what I personally know and without breaching confidences. Bill Cobb of Slate & Shell has already raised this idea as a way of getting Gateway To All Marvels (Xuanxuan Qijing) published. His thinking was that as it's a major representative of Chinese culture, somebody like a Chinese businessman might wish to see it appear in English as a way of promoting awareness of Chinese culture. But, as far as I know, there is nothing concrete behind that.
Your version - many subscribers - has also been suggested and in principle it can obviously work, as subscription concerts prove. But it seems like a lot of extra work, with complications such as having to return money if a target is not reached. Even when it was functioning, the book market offered little reward for everyone in it (except perhaps outside printers and the postmen!). Extra work and hassle just get back to that situation may not seem justified to everyone - I don't think I'd want it.
I think it would be useful also to scotch the idea that this is all about making pots of money. Like most people in the productive go world I can make much more money doing other things. Go is a hobby, and few people seriously expect to get rich from a hobby. But it's a hobby that can cost producers quite a bit of money, such as source books, printing costs, picture rights, software, etc. Most people of normal means that I know in go or similar hobby businesses feel that the base line is that they'll give their time but must recover their costs. Obviously any surplus that can be called profit is nice, but it's not really profit as no account is taken of the time. It may not be logical, but it does seems that while people are keen to get their other outgoings back, they are generally more relaxed about time, which many might regard as more valuable! With my well known aversion to logic chopping you won't be surprised to know that I accept it just as part of human nature.
I think this is the same situation with, for example, organising tournaments. But in my experience this approach is so common even outside of go that it has to be called the norm.
It can be a struggle to get your basic costs back. I know one book (not mine) that took 12 years to do that, and generally it is a slow, years-long process. Sometimes you can even lose out and never recover costs. Against that background, it becomes extremely frustrating and annoying when people pirate or plagiarise your work. In the sense that everyone I know in the business (not just westerners) is annoyed and frustrated by it, it seems safe to call those feelings normal human nature too, whether you think it's logical or not. Most of the cases adduced to prove that many people do give their work out freely turn out on inspection to be special cases: e.g. people who are extremely wealthy and so able to feel especially philanthropic, or people like academics who have already been paid tenure to produce works, or people who are doing it to boost their cv or promote some other activity.
I haven't suffered as much as some people in the go world, so I'm not quite as frustrated or annoyed as they are. I just happen to be more voluble about the problem. In line with that I will say that I regard the immature "property is theft" youngsters with the utmost scorn. I understand that those people who sold photocopies of Invincible at a European Congress mysteriously regarded their takings as their property. Two lots of theft in one go! Three if the photocopying was bootlegged in the office.
There is also a separate issue of respect. There are several people here (and Daniel is one of them) who can vouch for the fact that GoGoD, for example, has given free permission to people to use our database. I have given free permission to some people to translate ny books into foreign languages. I know others who have done similar things and in some cases I or GoGoD have been the beneficiary. The important thing is asking. Unless you've produced some public work it may be hard to understand, but very often what an author treasures as much as or even more than royalties is control of his work.
Respect (or lack of it) comes up in another way. Robust discussion is to be welcomed, but when I (as an example) offer an opinion on a topic such as this, to which I am perfectly entitled, which is formed not from thin air but from my own experiences, and which does not harm anyone else, I am attacked for "persecution mania" or neuroses or racism by mostly anonymous immature newbies, compulsive but unfunny wisecrackers, amateur psychologists, testosterone sufferers, feminists and others who rarely read carefully what is written anyway. I often get the impression that many people here think I'm not allowed to have opinion.