View Single Post
Old 11-14-2012, 12:43 PM   #328
Catlady
Wizard
Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Catlady's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,849
Karma: 7779374
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: jetBook Lite, Libre Color
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoldlyDubious View Post
Well, not necessarily "legal trouble". I think that a reasonably low fine (something like a few hundred dollars/euros) would be a more than sufficient deterrent. That said: if your carelessness damages someone else (the authors of your ebooks and their publishers) from getting the reward for their work, why shouldn't you get a punishment?
You think if I'm a little bit careless with a digital file, I should have to pay a few hundred bucks? That's absurd.

Quote:
No, you get blamed (and fined) for having personally given your files to at least one untrustworthy person who shared them with someone else while knowing that this may likely get you into trouble and damage the authors of your media. You had full control over this choice; you were careless; you pay the fine...
No. I get blamed if I let one person share the file. I have no control over who that person trusts, I have no control over whether that person's computer is hacked, I have no control over whether that person is careless. And so on and so on--there could be infinite levels of people who could disseminate that file, and when it ends up somewhere on a file-sharing site, then what? I'm supposed to trace how it happened? And at each level, there is less and less incentive for the person who has the file to safeguard it--because he's not the one who gets blamed. The net effect is that I would be unwilling to EVER let the first person share the file. This may be a benefit to the publishers and authors, but it's NO benefit to me as the consumer and is much more onerous than the current DRM.

Quote:
No, absolutely. There are people I trust: I would easily trust them not to share my files, and I would happily lend my media to them.
What my proposal does is preventing loaning to little-known or untrusted people. I find this an acceptable limitation of what I can do with my media.
No, it doesn't do that. It means you have to trust every person who is trusted by the person you trust, and every person those people trust, and so on and so on. And not only trust them to not distribute the file, but to safeguard it zealously, when they have absolutely no incentive to do so.

It's simply wrong to make the initial owner of the file liable for any and every nefarious use of the file.
Catlady is offline   Reply With Quote