[Xenophon]

Format C: -- there are a few bugs in your analysis. I'll address them interspersed.

Originally Posted by Format C:

That's the fun part of Ethics....

I buy the Hardcover, and then I download the ebook from the dark
Cost: HC full price.
Consequence: author and publisher get paid for one copy. I got two copies
The act is illegal in some jurisdiction, and unethical to most people.

Opinions on the ethics of this one vary. It clearly involves an illegal act in many jurisdictions—the UPloading of the copy you downloaded. The act of downloading is legal in some jurisdictions and not in others. YMMV, and all that.

Originally Posted by Format C:

I buy the Hardcover used in mint condition from ebay, I scan & OCR myself the book.
Cost: HC half price, 5 hours of work.
Consequence: author and publisher are not paid. I got two copies.
The act is legal with few exceptions, and it is considered ethical almost by everyone.

Actually, the author and publisher were paid. They got their money at the original sale of the HC -- and that's all the law says that they are entitled to. Most folks (IMHO) agree that neither author nor publisher has any claim on any part of subsequent re-sale of the HC. Law and ethics both satisfied in my opinion. As always, YMMV.

Originally Posted by Format C:

I buy the HC used, and don't make a digital copy at all
Cost: HC half price
Consequence: author and publisher are not paid.
The act is legal and ethical everywhere.

As with the previous example, the author and the publisher WERE PAID IN FULL when the original purchaser bought the HC. That's exactly why this is legal and ethical everywhere! Your analysis of the consequence is flawed.

Originally Posted by Format C:

Let's go one step further:
I sell the HC half price.
If I keep the digital copy, even if it's buried down somewhere in the middle of an heap of old CD-ROM that will be trashed in a couple of years, I'm doing bad.
If I don't keep that copy, nobody will trust me, and everybody thinks I'm keeping it.
Unethical in both cases, maybe illegal somewhere (I don't know...)

Keeping the digital copy when you sell the original violates is a copyright violation. The fair-use argument for time- and format-shifting supported by the US courts is that your legal possession (ownership, really) of the original copy is necessary to make the shifting fair-use. If you sell or give away the original, you "must" delete any format-shifted copies. Note: "must" was in quotes because no sensible person will care about that old archived backup of your hard disk (or whatever). But you really should make a reasonable effort to get rid of your copies. At least delete them from your active storage (whether that storage is hard-disk, flash drive, or CD-on-the-shelf).

Originally Posted by Format C:

Last step:
I haven't got any digital copy at all. The only copy of that book I ever saw, is the Hardcover I bought for 5$ at a garage sell.
I read the book, and I sell it for 12$ on ebay.
Now, not only I read the book without any form of compensation for the author or the publisher. I'm even making money out of it.
And it's legal everywhere, and, I bet, it's ethically fair to almost everybody.

Gong! Same analysis bug as before. The author and publisher already got their compensation for that particular copy of the book.

Originally Posted by Format C:

That's why I say that when ethics are involved, Digital is Evil.
The "unheticality" of an action is definitely unproportioned when it's performed in the digital world.

No comment one way or the other on this last bit.

Xenophon
(Who is not a lawyer, and is not providing legal advice!)