10-08-2007, 11:55 AM | #91 | |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
One might similarly say that there's nothing technically difficult about stealing cars - 10 year olds can (and do) do it. The fact that it's not difficult to do doesn't mean that everyone goes around doing it; you have to make a deliberate decision to do it, knowing full well that you're breaking the law by doing so. The fundamental problem, as I've said before, is that stealing intellectual property (computer software, CDs, DVDs, etc) appears to have somehow become "socially acceptable", even "admired" perhaps, among at least a portion of the younger generation today. When I was a kid, me and all my friends used to go out and buy "45" RPM records virtually every week, and use a significant part of our "pocket money" to do so. Many kids today seem to think that they have some "God-given right" to download for free whatever music they wish, rather than paying for it. And that's despite the fact that stores such as iTunes make it very easy to buy music legally, and it prices which are far lower in real terms than we used to pay for our records back in the '70s. |
|
10-08-2007, 12:02 PM | #92 | |
Retired & reading more!
Posts: 2,764
Karma: 1884247
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Alabama, USA
Device: Kindle 1, iPad Air 2, iPhone 6S+, Kobo Aura One
|
Quote:
Personally I do not hold with piracy (of any kind). This includes the "legal" piracy that industries do when they restrict my rights to do with property I purchased any thing I want to. Some here have said that if we didn't want to put up with DRM we could just not purchase anything with DRM. Using that paradigm, if the entertainment didn't want to put up with piracy, they could just not sell entertainment. I'm sure you'd agree that does not make any sense. IMO it is immoral for industry to sell me a crippled product that they have purposely crippled, especially when they either hide the fact in the small print or don't even bother to tell me like Sony's rootkit which was illegal. Sauce for the goose/sauce for the gander. |
|
10-08-2007, 12:12 PM | #93 |
eReader
Posts: 2,750
Karma: 4968470
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: Note 5; PW3; Nook HD+; ChuWi Hi12; iPad
|
It's not enough to simply refuse to purchase products with DRM, one also has to purchase products without it.
|
10-08-2007, 12:15 PM | #94 |
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 a decision that we all have to take individually. As I've said before, DRM doesn't particularly bother me one way or another. Obviously I'd prefer that it didn't exist, but I fully understand why many publishers feel it necessary to use it.
|
10-08-2007, 12:22 PM | #95 | ||
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10-08-2007, 01:58 PM | #96 | |
Addict
Posts: 273
Karma: 499
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Francisco
Device: Sony Reader
|
Quote:
Copyright protection exists for one reason only - to encourage the production of art for the good of society. There is no other reason to have the law - there is no universal right to have your creation protected from copying. So if copyright protection is not needed in order to encourage production, or it is not effective, or if it harms society more than it aids, then it is not fulfilling its purpose, and should be abandoned or reworked. I would argue that all three of these things are true, and that copyright (for the most part) is an outdated concept that is meaningless in an age of digital plenty. For the good of society, copyright law should be reworked to reflect the lack of scarcity and the unbinding of creative works from physical media. |
|
10-08-2007, 02:14 PM | #97 | |
Retired & reading more!
Posts: 2,764
Karma: 1884247
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Alabama, USA
Device: Kindle 1, iPad Air 2, iPhone 6S+, Kobo Aura One
|
Quote:
Looked at realistically, you could say that writing something in a language that I don't understand is a form of encryption and therefore to translate it would be a violation of copyright. But no one is suing Babblefish (yet!). |
|
10-08-2007, 02:25 PM | #98 | |
Gizmologist
Posts: 11,615
Karma: 929550
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3
|
Quote:
The originals are just as scarce as they ever were -- only one person can create each original, the fact that copying and distribution is cheap and easy hasn't changed that. Very few folks are wealthy enough to do something like writing for free -- if they depend on it for their bread and cheese then they need some safe-guard on the income (I'm not arguing for any particular approach, only pointing out the issue). In the absence of such a safe-guard, most will have to find some other way to put food on the table. The next point is usually something like "true writers have to write, and will do so regardless." That's generally true. But it's extremely low, petty, greedy, and several other unprintable things, to take advantage of that fact to leave true writers in poverty because we, as a society, refuse to acknowledge that they should have some way to secure a living from their labors, just because it's cheap and easy to rip them off. If they can't reliably sell what they write, then they can't afford to write -- and they can't sell it if the filthy so and so down the way is giving away copies or selling them for pennies. If the impact is severe enough then they'll have to choose to either stop writing, or starve to death, and either way, nothing much gets written. Okay, end of rant. I'd agree, however, that copyright law is seriously overdue for a total rebuild from the ground up, and the non-physical nature of modern media needs to be addressed ... among many other issues, but protecting the concept of protecting the creators of them from shameless exploitation, and balancing it against the good of society at large should be heart and soul of that re-build. It's not in anybody's best interest for work to be unprotected just because it's easy to copy. |
|
10-08-2007, 03:02 PM | #99 |
fruminous edugeek
Posts: 6,745
Karma: 551260
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Northeast US
Device: iPad, eBw 1150
|
And just to head off another possible argument-- many writers, musicians, etc. will still create, even if they aren't paid. But the best writers and musicians I know all acknowledge that it takes a lot of time, effort, and attention to really become good at their art. If they have to hold down a "day job" because their art can't support them, they are unlikely to become as good as they could if they could devote themselves to their art full-time.
I want my favorite writers to spend their time writing, not flipping burgers or building websites. I want my favorite musicians to be able to spend as much time as possible actually playing and composing, not sweeping floors or balancing spreadsheets. And for that to happen, their work needs to be protected so that they get paid when they create something that many people like enough to want to read, listen to, watch, etc. Now, should the cost to the consumer still reflect physical media and production costs? Of course not. Should the sale price have to include restrictive software that keeps the purchaser from enjoying their purchase wherever or whenever they like? Heck no! There's a lot wrong with the content industries today, and their business models and the laws that protect them need review and revision. But I stand firm on my position that the creators (and those who help them, like editors and sound engineers) need to be paid-- and deserve to be paid-- for their honest work. |
10-08-2007, 03:07 PM | #100 |
Retired & reading more!
Posts: 2,764
Karma: 1884247
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Alabama, USA
Device: Kindle 1, iPad Air 2, iPhone 6S+, Kobo Aura One
|
I only say this, NatCh, because you got so serious on us. But this is not completely accurate, else there would be no books with two or more credited authors. Unless you get picky & break the book into the individual author's parts.
|
10-08-2007, 03:21 PM | #101 | |
Technogeezer
Posts: 7,233
Karma: 1601464
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Device: Sony PRS-500
|
Quote:
|
|
10-08-2007, 03:32 PM | #102 |
Gizmologist
Posts: 11,615
Karma: 929550
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3
|
Yes, in those situations, I'd insist on getting picky, just to support my point.
|
10-08-2007, 04:50 PM | #103 | |||
Wizard
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
10-08-2007, 04:53 PM | #104 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
|
Quote:
The "it only prevents casual piracy" excuse was bogus a long time ago. |
|
10-08-2007, 04:55 PM | #105 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
|
Quote:
And I'll point out that when the cassette came out, many kids (who usually have little money) pirated many songs. The music industry didn't die then either. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Editorial: Are Too Many E-books Stealing the Pleasure of Reading? | Bob Russell | General Discussions | 75 | 05-24-2010 12:11 PM |
Stealing Light by Gary Gibson | tech_au | Reading Recommendations | 5 | 01-18-2009 01:21 PM |
More on ripping CDs | Nate the great | News | 10 | 12-13-2007 12:03 PM |
Ripping a CD... UPDATE | Nate the great | Lounge | 66 | 10-18-2007 03:32 PM |