Register Guidelines E-Books Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   MobileRead Forums > E-Book General > News

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-29-2009, 09:59 AM   #61
tompe
Grand Sorcerer
tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
Quote:
Originally Posted by HansTWN View Post
I never accused anyone of theft -- I just stated the obvious, that taking something that one has no right to take is theft. Unlike Moejoe ,
But you know that this is not obvious since you have participated in discussions here at MR before about this if I remember correctly. So pretending that it is obvious to make other look bad is kind of bad behavior.

All the debates would be better if people could use the correct term which in this case is copyright infringement and not theft.
tompe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 03:44 PM   #62
Tuna
Zealot
Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.
 
Posts: 114
Karma: 325
Join Date: May 2009
Device: Cool-ER
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon View Post
Sure. But I feel entirely justified in buying a second hand print copy, specifically so I can read the book without the publisher seeing a single penny from me.
But they do see an (indirect) penny from you. The person who sold that book second hand may well use the money to buy another book. Or they may buy books they otherwise couldn't afford because they know they can get some money back by selling them on later.
Tuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Advert
Old 09-29-2009, 04:11 PM   #63
Moejoe
Banned
Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.
 
Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Mojoe, however, is in the UK, so if he borrows a book from the library, the author of that book receives a payment. I repeat my question: Moejoe states that downloading a book is no different to borrowing from the library, so how, given that he states this to be the case, does the author receive their PLR payment?
They don't. And they don't if I find a book in the street, borrow it from a friend, memorize it, tattoo parts of it on my bum and then recite it to myself secretly under the covers before I go to bed at night by the cunning use of a flashlight and a mirror.

Why are you so concerned with the PLR payment (which we've argued about before and in which we saw that the vast majority of authors never see anything like a pound from over the course of the year)? Why aren't all you people decrying file-sharing and 'theft' not looking at the actual publishing companies that are fleecing, and have been fleecing authors for the last 100 years.

If you all care so much about authors where's your outrage over the 5% in royalties and the £2,000 advances on a novel a new author gets? Where's your outrage about authors who have to take second and third jobs to make ends meet because the publishing companies couldn't be arsed pushing said author or doing any advertising? Where's your condemnation of an industry that regularly 'pulps' half of its output rather than donate those books to people who might be able to use them?

If you want me to respect the copyright of publishers, then you're going to have to convince me they deserve that respect. As it is, I wouldn't spit on the lot of them if they were on fire (small publishers excluded of course).
Moejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:19 PM   #64
Tuna
Zealot
Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.
 
Posts: 114
Karma: 325
Join Date: May 2009
Device: Cool-ER
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe View Post
It's a really really good thing that copying a digital file is not theft then, isn't it? Maybe, maybe it's copyright infringement, if you believe in such antiquated things, but it certainly isn't theft.
Ah, yes of course, you're not a freeloader, you're sticking it to the man!

You used the 'theft causes deprivation' definition. Well, let's see - you could have bought a book. The money you spent supports the publisher, editor, proof reader, typesetter, cover artist, distributor and of course the author. You might object to the distribution of your money, but it remains a fact that all of these people played a part in getting the book to you.

Instead you chose to steal a book. To take it without paying. Your defence is that you wouldn't be buying that book anyway because of the regional restrictions. So by your logic, no-one has lost any money. Except you could have bought another book to read - a physical copy of the book you wanted, or another book on your 'to-read' list. So, someone has lost out, because you've chosen to take your entertainment for free. You've also done your best to support the mechanism by which you stole the book - so others reading this very public forum are more likely to choose not to pay either.

Most of the people who work to bring you a physical book also work to bring you an electronic book. The author, editor, proof reader, cover artist, publisher and so on all contribute to create that work. In the physical case, they can afford to do that because they can spread the cost of doing so between x-thousand books. The fact that it's physical makes it seem more 'natural' to pay for it.

When a book is sold electronically, there is still the need to spread the cost of it's production. The ones and zeros may cost nothing to reproduce, but their arrangement into something you want to read does. So it does actually make a lot of sense to spread that cost between the people who read the electronic copy. How can you claim that, just because the delivery mechanism is free, the costs of production magically vanish?

You suggest that expecting to pay and the concept of theft are old fashioned ideas. I suggest that you're being old fashioned by thinking that something has to be physical to have value or cost.

I've also come across the fallacy that just because a book can be reproduced ad-infinitum electronically, the value of a copy is vanishingly small anyway. The problem here is that just because you can reproduce it endlessly doesn't mean it's read endlessly - the audience doesn't necessarily grow (in fact, the audience for electronic books can be depressingly small). So again, we come up against the need to distribute the cost across a given audience for a book.

I agree entirely that regional restrictions are ridiculous, and fully support the right of people to shop elsewhere. The laws that built up to protect our rights in the physical world do get rather twisted in the virtual world. The history of world trade is complex and explains a lot of the oddities we see exposed by the internet. However, the spirit of the law still applies - if someone works to entertain you, they can choose to do so on the condition or expectation that you pay them. If their conditions upset you, shop elsewhere. It's still no excuse to steal.
Tuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:24 PM   #65
Tuna
Zealot
Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.
 
Posts: 114
Karma: 325
Join Date: May 2009
Device: Cool-ER
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe View Post

If you want me to respect the copyright of publishers, then you're going to have to convince me they deserve that respect. As it is, I wouldn't spit on the lot of them if they were on fire (small publishers excluded of course).
In this time of self-publishing online, it is the author's right to choose how they distribute their works. You may have no respect for the publishers, but clearly the authors who publish through them don't quite share your point of view. What right do you have to deny the author's chosen means of earning money, just because you object to the the publisher they have chosen? Have you some higher moral authority than them?
Tuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Advert
Old 09-29-2009, 04:25 PM   #66
Moejoe
Banned
Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.
 
Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna View Post
Ah, yes of course, you're not a freeloader, you're sticking it to the man!

You used the 'theft causes deprivation' definition. Well, let's see - you could have bought a book. The money you spent supports the publisher, editor, proof reader, typesetter, cover artist, distributor and of course the author. You might object to the distribution of your money, but it remains a fact that all of these people played a part in getting the book to you.

Instead you chose to steal a book. To take it without paying. Your defence is that you wouldn't be buying that book anyway because of the regional restrictions. So by your logic, no-one has lost any money. Except you could have bought another book to read - a physical copy of the book you wanted, or another book on your 'to-read' list. So, someone has lost out, because you've chosen to take your entertainment for free. You've also done your best to support the mechanism by which you stole the book - so others reading this very public forum are more likely to choose not to pay either.

Most of the people who work to bring you a physical book also work to bring you an electronic book. The author, editor, proof reader, cover artist, publisher and so on all contribute to create that work. In the physical case, they can afford to do that because they can spread the cost of doing so between x-thousand books. The fact that it's physical makes it seem more 'natural' to pay for it.

When a book is sold electronically, there is still the need to spread the cost of it's production. The ones and zeros may cost nothing to reproduce, but their arrangement into something you want to read does. So it does actually make a lot of sense to spread that cost between the people who read the electronic copy. How can you claim that, just because the delivery mechanism is free, the costs of production magically vanish?

You suggest that expecting to pay and the concept of theft are old fashioned ideas. I suggest that you're being old fashioned by thinking that something has to be physical to have value or cost.

I've also come across the fallacy that just because a book can be reproduced ad-infinitum electronically, the value of a copy is vanishingly small anyway. The problem here is that just because you can reproduce it endlessly doesn't mean it's read endlessly - the audience doesn't necessarily grow (in fact, the audience for electronic books can be depressingly small). So again, we come up against the need to distribute the cost across a given audience for a book.

I agree entirely that regional restrictions are ridiculous, and fully support the right of people to shop elsewhere. The laws that built up to protect our rights in the physical world do get rather twisted in the virtual world. The history of world trade is complex and explains a lot of the oddities we see exposed by the internet. However, the spirit of the law still applies - if someone works to entertain you, they can choose to do so on the condition or expectation that you pay them. If their conditions upset you, shop elsewhere. It's still no excuse to steal.
Again, and I'll repeat just in case you really are just being belligerent;

Copying is not stealing

Not under the law

Not as a definition

Not as a social act


Why don't you stop worrying about pirates and adjust your sails? (Stolen from Dan Bull )
Moejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:30 PM   #67
ahi
Wizard
ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ahi ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,790
Karma: 507333
Join Date: May 2009
Device: none
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna View Post
Ah, yes of course, you're not a freeloader, you're sticking it to the man!

You used the 'theft causes deprivation' definition. Well, let's see - you could have bought a book. The money you spent supports the publisher, editor, proof reader, typesetter, cover artist, distributor and of course the author. You might object to the distribution of your money, but it remains a fact that all of these people played a part in getting the book to you.

Instead you chose to steal a book. To take it without paying. Your defence is that you wouldn't be buying that book anyway because of the regional restrictions. So by your logic, no-one has lost any money. Except you could have bought another book to read - a physical copy of the book you wanted, or another book on your 'to-read' list. So, someone has lost out, because you've chosen to take your entertainment for free.
I think any person that doesn't buy at least one product every single day despite having the money for it should be summarily executed.

That saves the need of trying to omnisciently ascertain whether or not they "would have" bought it, had they not in their gravest moral bankruptcy chosen to do otherwise.

If you didn't buy today, I say: "Could've, would've, should've... but you ain't gonna no more. BAM! You were the weakest link!"

- Ahi
ahi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:32 PM   #68
kennyc
The Dank Side of the Moon
kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kennyc's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe View Post
Download it for free from a file sharing network. If these companies think they can treat the internet and its users as anything but part of 'one country' then they're idiots and don't deserve your money.

Let them and their businesses rot.

Buy independent, share freely, embrace the future.
Like your new avatar Moejoe!

kennyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:47 PM   #69
kennyc
The Dank Side of the Moon
kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kennyc's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
It's a legal thing. If you buy a paper book, the "point of sale" is deemed to be the bookstore; if you buy an eBook, the point of sale is the customer's computer.
Is it? I don't think it's that clear. In fact if I had to say, I'd say it was the location of the website that does the authorization of the credit card and issues and tracks the sale.
kennyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:53 PM   #70
kennyc
The Dank Side of the Moon
kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kennyc's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moejoe View Post
Again, and I'll repeat just in case you really are just being belligerent;

Copying is not stealing

Not under the law

Not as a definition

Not as a social act

Of course it is wrong both in a legal and ethical sense unless that person has intentionally given the rights away. Ethically anything created by a person is their property. Taking that property is stealing.
kennyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:57 PM   #71
Moejoe
Banned
Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.
 
Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna View Post
In this time of self-publishing online, it is the author's right to choose how they distribute their works. You may have no respect for the publishers, but clearly the authors who publish through them don't quite share your point of view. What right do you have to deny the author's chosen means of earning money, just because you object to the the publisher they have chosen? Have you some higher moral authority than them?
Again, you're making assumptions where there are none to be made. If I download a file no money is lost, I don't deny the author anything because of the nature of a digital file, there is nothing to be denied. What the author might gain is a reader, a fan, even an evangelist for their work. It's exactly the same if a friend loans me a book, or I pick up an old paperback on a train seat.

As far as I can see it, the only way to handle the digital age is to reverse the old paradigms of buying/selling.

Now you get it for free and pay-if-you-like after you've consumed the entertainment. Authors/Musicians/Creative types get compensated for their work, but more than that, they get readers, viewers, listeners. And that's more important than money any day of the week. Bonus, the audience will never have to have that "I paid X amount of money for that rubbish! What was I thinking!" moment ever again
Moejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:57 PM   #72
tompe
Grand Sorcerer
tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc View Post
Ethically anything created by a person is their property.
No, it is not. Maybe in some ethical systems but not in all. And I am not sure it is true in any ethical system. At least not trivially since the definition of "created" is problematic.
tompe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 04:59 PM   #73
Moejoe
Banned
Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.Moejoe did not drink the Kool Aid.
 
Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc View Post
Of course it is wrong both in a legal and ethical sense unless that person has intentionally given the rights away. Ethically anything created by a person is their property. Taking that property is stealing.

No it is not. You're quite wrong. A digital file is just that, a file, zeros and ones. You are not depriving anybody of anything when you copy a file. You are not stealing, ethically, morally or any other way, no matter how you might 'feel'. The worst that you can be accused of is 'copyright infringement', but even then, because no money is charged or profit made, it would never be taken too seriously (anywhere but America that is).
Moejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 05:01 PM   #74
kennyc
The Dank Side of the Moon
kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kennyc ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kennyc's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe View Post
No, it is not. Maybe in some ethical systems but not in all. And I am not sure it is true in any ethical system. At least not trivially since the definition of "created" is problematic.
as is the definition of 'ethical'
kennyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 05:02 PM   #75
Tuna
Zealot
Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.Tuna has a complete set of Star Wars action figures.
 
Posts: 114
Karma: 325
Join Date: May 2009
Device: Cool-ER
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahi View Post
I think any person that doesn't buy at least one product every single day despite having the money for it should be summarily executed.

That saves the need of trying to omnisciently ascertain whether or not they "would have" bought it, had they not in their gravest moral bankruptcy chosen to do otherwise.

If you didn't buy today, I say: "Could've, would've, should've... but you ain't gonna no more. BAM! You were the weakest link!"

- Ahi
You're a smart person Ahi, so I can't quite understand what value you place in deliberately misinterpreting what other people are trying to get across?
Tuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More App Restrictions kennyc Apple Devices 12 06-02-2010 02:29 PM
Anyway to bypass regional restrictions? seagull General Discussions 49 05-16-2010 09:07 AM
An email from Amazon (regional restrictions) DawnFalcon News 32 12-25-2009 05:06 PM
No Geo-restrictions seagull Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links) 3 12-14-2009 01:07 AM
Regional copyright quesiton on MR books boydcarts Feedback 8 02-22-2009 01:50 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:34 PM.


MobileRead.com is a privately owned, operated and funded community.