10-05-2012, 06:50 AM | #91 | |
Guru
Posts: 753
Karma: 1496807
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Third World
Device: iLiad + PRS-505 + Kindle 3
|
Quote:
I'm with you with the first part: everyone who worked on the book pruduction (not just the author) has been damaged by the one who get the content of the book without permission (*). But you cannot say that the mere possession of a copy of a file, which did not belong to anyone, is enriching someone. No way. Let's make an example: You write a book and sell it in DRM-free epub version. I create a file on my disk with the exact same name and size. Am I robbing you? No. I'm just citing your book title ath the most. Do the file I created belong to you? No. Now, suppose that the file on my computer has also the same exact content as the file on your computer, but it's never been opened. Are you being damaged? I say no: the mere existence of this file, that you did not make, that you never saw, that nobody ever read, cannot damage you in any way. I defy everybody to demonstrate the contrary (**). Is someone getting profit or some kind of unearned advantage? Still, I say no (***): the occupation of some bytes of disk does not makes me richer in any way, nor am I using your work in any way. So, until now, nobody has been damaged and nobody has taken profit. Let's go a step further. Now, I open the file I created and read it. And it actually contains your novel. Now, I'm damaging you: I did not contribute in any way to your finances. And I'm actually enriching myself of your deep insight about life, without your permission, neither explicit nor implicit. Now I'm "pirating" your book, never before this very moment (****). Of course you can assume that if I have the file on my disk, I accessed your content. But, like I said before, if last week I got somehow one big archive with 10.000 of books in it, are you assuming that I read them all? Of course, when it comes to law and enforcement we have to be practical. And here is where we have to make a choice: the "downloaders-are-criminals" party is de facto stating that the law must assume that I'm able to collapse centuries of reading in one week, the "leave-downloaders-alone" supporters are not willing to make this assumption: to them, being practically impossibile to proove the access to the actual content and to discriminate what I really read from my 10k package, I should be acquitted for insufficient evidence (*****). What is your choice? _____________________ (*) the permission is critical: book borrowers, library goers, present receivers, and lots of other people are reading the book without paying for it. I will never consider them "criminal" nor "pirates" by any means. (**) in this case, physical goods analogy like counterfeiting are dismissed in advance as ridiculous and clearly out of context. (***) the advantage for hard disk producers is negligible in the case of a single book. And we will never find some author go after Seagate because they produced the disk drive where alleged illicit material was stored... (****) maybe, in some countries the Law may say that I was a criminal from the moment I gave the same name to a file, but I'm not talking Laws, by now. So, please, try to read it from an abstract point of view. (*****) of course, if forensics can proove beyond any reasonable doubt that I read the content of the file, I've been proven guilty. But it can't. |
|
10-05-2012, 07:08 AM | #92 | |
PHD in Horribleness
Posts: 2,320
Karma: 23599604
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In the ironbound section, near avenue L
Device: Just a whole bunch. I guess I am a collector now.
|
Quote:
Because the works in question typically are not copyrighted outside of their country of origin. So no, no harm no foul until such a time as the creators want to pay for the copyright. Copyright is not (nor should it be) free. |
|
Advert | |
|
10-05-2012, 07:11 AM | #93 |
PHD in Horribleness
Posts: 2,320
Karma: 23599604
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In the ironbound section, near avenue L
Device: Just a whole bunch. I guess I am a collector now.
|
See my last post. It is neither morally nor legally acceptable for the creator to expect protection while not filing or paying for copyright.
|
10-05-2012, 07:31 AM | #94 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
|
10-05-2012, 07:41 AM | #95 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
That's the purpose of the International Berne Copyright Convention. It grants people from other countries the same protection in your country that citizens of your country get. So I'm afraid you're incorrect - works are automatically copyrighted in any country which is a signatory to the Berne Convention.
|
Advert | |
|
10-05-2012, 08:15 AM | #96 | |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
Quote:
e.g If I nip onto a file sharing site and download a copy of your software, you have not lost any ability to sell your software to others, so it cannot be theft. You _may_ have lost money from me not paying for the usage of the software, I agree on that, however not every download is a loss, some are some aren't. That imho is why piracy and theft must remain distinct laws. Regarding the fence analogy, once the person has painted the fence and been paid that's it. They've been paid $100 for the 10 hours work they just put in. They do not get paid anything further for time they didn't paint the fence. With software, if you put in 100 hours and get paid $10 per copy for 100 copies. You've now made a similar rate to the fence painter who painted at $10/h. In writing software you may have received recompense for the amount of labour you put in just as the fence painter did by hitting 100 copies (or whatever is needed to reach a suitable rate to compensate for the hours worked, certainly much higher than $10, but this is just a for arguments sake*value). To receive any more money under that same analogy, you would have to paint a new fence (i.e put the hours in writing a new product). Software isn't treated like labour (the end product), hourly rates don't really apply, whilst the people producing it may charge an hourly rate, the final owner who sells it wants much more than to cover the costs of labour. Hence the analogy is imo incorrect. To count _every_ download/use of your product as a loss, then you have to treat the software as a labour only endeavour which would imply a cut off point any sales. Once you've reached the hourly rate to cover your labour costs should you then expect to be paid again and again? Should the fence painter turn around the following day and say, I want another $100 but won't be painting your fence today as it's still got paint on from yesterday? So, I return to my original point, there is no clearly defined loss for software piracy. Certainly not as clear as the case of theft or even breach of contract (i.e the fence painting payment withholding) Last edited by JoeD; 10-05-2012 at 08:40 AM. |
|
10-05-2012, 08:18 AM | #97 |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
|
10-05-2012, 08:28 AM | #98 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
|
10-05-2012, 09:52 AM | #99 |
Basculocolpic
Posts: 4,356
Karma: 20181319
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sweden
Device: Kindle 3 WiFi, Kindle 4SO, Kindle for Android, Sony PRS-350 and PRS-T1
|
Why would creators want to pay for their copyright? Sorry, but I must have misunderstood something. I thought you were granted copyright and that is protected through international treaties.
|
10-05-2012, 10:02 AM | #100 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,549
Karma: 3799999
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: O'Fallon, Missouri, USA
Device: Nokia N800, PRS-505, Nook STR Glowlight, Kindle 3
|
Quote:
Also, the fence analogy doesn't work because the painter is out materials in addition to their labor. The deprivation argument kicks in there. |
|
10-05-2012, 12:08 PM | #101 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
That's why I said that I supply him with the paint, but I just refuse to pay him for his labour. But hey, according to some, he shouldn't be annoyed with me. After all, the fact that I've refused to pay him doesn't mean that I refuse to pay everybody, and I might perhaps pay him some money at some indeterminate point in the future, so what does he have to complain about?
|
10-05-2012, 12:22 PM | #102 | |
Guru
Posts: 826
Karma: 18573626
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Canada
Device: Kobo Touch, Nexus 7 (2013)
|
Quote:
These arguments always break down into tiresome squabbling about analogies, and usually the analogies only work for tangible goods rather than infinite goods. |
|
10-05-2012, 12:31 PM | #103 | |
Guru
Posts: 753
Karma: 1496807
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Third World
Device: iLiad + PRS-505 + Kindle 3
|
Quote:
In reality, the painter painted my fence, I paid him, I clicked a magical button, and your fence was magically painted as an exact copy of my one without any extra effort, with your own paint, which was not reduced in quantity in the process. |
|
10-05-2012, 09:58 PM | #104 | |
Guru
Posts: 826
Karma: 18573626
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Canada
Device: Kobo Touch, Nexus 7 (2013)
|
Quote:
|
|
10-05-2012, 10:32 PM | #105 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,061
Karma: 39379388
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: near Philadelphia USA
Device: Kindle Kids Edition, Fire HD 10 (11th generation)
|
Quote:
You could then ask whether my real objection is to the piracy, or to the talking about piracy. If so, I'd say that human nature is to talk, so they inevitably go together. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What novel would you request in prison? | AprilHare | Lounge | 15 | 10-27-2012 08:40 AM |
Time magazine not downloading correctly | Groliji | Recipes | 3 | 05-06-2011 12:02 PM |
Escape from Prison Puzzle | pdurrant | Lounge | 63 | 06-23-2010 01:01 PM |
Electronic Readers in Prison? | Madam Broshkina | Lounge | 2 | 05-07-2008 06:21 AM |