Correct, the law was on his side. If he was offered the 10k he initially took and not it being a result of his demands I would be on his side as well. He opted for the less risky option - a flat fee - and because of that I don’t believe he was morally entitled to the higher, more risky payment structure he flat out refused to consider. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
And? The law predicted exactly such situation and he was well within his rights.
Correct, the law was on his side. If he was offered the 10k he initially took and not it being a result of his demands I would be on his side as well. He opted for the less risky option - a flat fee - and because of that I don’t believe he was morally entitled to the higher, more risky payment structure he flat out refused to consider. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Fortunately, the law disagrees with you and protects the artist, not corporations.