Will piracy force the success of ebooks?

[rsperberg]

When Leigh and Baigent had a dispute with Dan Brown over infringement of their ideas, they had to go to court and sue the author of "The Da Vinci Code." That was in England. But in the U.S., the "owners" of non-physical material, aka intellectual "property," have succeeded getting the government to do the heavy lifting in enforcing their rights to profit from artists' creations.

Long ago it was established that purchasing a a physical copy of a song on tape or record (or later CD) meant you could transfer it to another medium and listen to it. But if you reason consistently and do the same with an e-book -- "I paid for a physical copy of the book; only one person is reading it at a time; I'm not disseminating it, just consuming it in a more convenient medium -- you are characterized the same as someone who sells thousands of copies of the book illegally.

So now you're a criminal, a "pirate," simply for regarding music and text as similar, since they have similar characteristics and are just soft- and not hard-ware.

This is nonsense, of course, though legal contortions and convenient lawmaking permit it. But 150 years ago, the same type of reasoning pertained to human "property" -- "it's always been regarded as property and the laws should protect me from its theft" -- and isn't it strange from this perspective to think of ownership of humans as being thought normal?

Won't our descendants look back at today's illogical efforts to treat what some call "the invisible world" as deserving of the same legal protections as items in the physical realm?

So why do we consent to this treatment and accept the use of the term "piracy" instead of "copyright infringement" or "potential licensing violation" or some such term more suited to the nature of the activity?

Thus the way your phrase it means I can't answer your question.

Piracy is someone taking a copy of a book and selling it as their own. Perhaps asserting one's right to have an electronic version of a book when one owns a physical copy isn't piracy but civil disobedience, intentional violation of an immoral and corrupt law.

There is a question I can answer -- Will e-books be helped by someone acting in a moral and consistent way ("I paid for the CD and I paid for the book") who assists electronic dissemination of texts?

Yes.

[Snappy!]

Originally Posted by rsperberg

Long ago it was established that purchasing a a physical copy of a song on tape or record (or later CD) meant you could transfer it to another medium and listen to it. But if you reason consistently and do the same with an e-book -- "I paid for a physical copy of the book; only one person is reading it at a time; I'm not disseminating it, just consuming it in a more convenient medium -- you are characterized the same as someone who sells thousands of copies of the book illegally.

Ya, but if a person distributes the electronic copy of the book, then its not read by only one person at a time is it?

Would not the onus to prove "that only one person is reading it at a time" be on the person who distributed. And just how will that be done?

[luag]

imho, it will help.

take a look at almost every popular devices. it involves that user could create their own content (and piracy helps, especially in developing countries)

walkman was popular because ppl could also mix their own tape.
VHS was popular because you could also tape your own content.
playstation is popular in most part of the world simply because the pirated games are cheap.
iPod is popular because ppl could easily put their own mp3s (pirated or legal) into it.

from hardware point of view, piracy helps....A LOT...

and if hardware is popular, anything related to it will also likely gain extra performance.

(apple was good to tap the new extra interest with iTunes)

[rsperberg]

Originally Posted by Snappy!

Ya, but if ...

Would not the onus to prove "that only one person ...

Look, do you think this system didn't work with records and tapes because of the same haziness around the edges?

The courts didn't think much of your argument. It seems that observing the spirit of the law suffices, even if some people take advantage of it to break the letter of the law.

[Snappy!]

rsperberg, so is that why the courts are ruling that unauthorised duplication and/or distribution of copyrighted materials is against the law?

Anyway, here's an interesting read on piracy http://www.answers.com/piracy&r=67 . The historical backdrop of piracy (I'm talking about the high seas kind of pirate! ) is one very interesting part of many nations.

[Snappy!]

Along the rein of "Will X force the success of ebooks?", I reckon that having a widespread platform, that is as ubiquitous as Windows (there I've said it), may just be what ebooks need.

As much as some may hate or bi*ch about Windows for its "monopoly", ebooks could do with such a widespread platform adoption. By platform, I mean ebook hardware + OS that is not necessarily tied to any particular ereader software. Basically, a PC structured model for an ebook.

MS or some OS folks (linux?) could write the OS that will run on say x86 or some hw platform. The hw platform should be opened or at least licensed, so that mobo makers can create their own variants of such ebook mobos, driving prices down. Some companies may choose to create a whole ebook, while others may not. There should be some standard stuffs as well. All these will help in bringing ebooks to the mass.

But ... as with any industries, its a chicken and egg thing. Even if iLiad or Hanlin or Sony releases their specs for licensing, there must be enough perceived demand for OEM makers to jump in. On the other hand, lack of standard and widespread adoption discourages consumers to buy a new product. So where is the missing spark? Piracy may fill in some of it, but will hardware alone make the difference?

[rsperberg]

Originally Posted by Snappy!

why [are] the courts are ruling that unauthorised duplication and/or distribution of copyrighted materials is against the law?

I just ran across an article in the Washington Post from April 21, 2006, that points out that if you purchased a movie on DVD and copied it "onto your Apple iPod, Sony PlayStation Portable, PDA, or notebook for an upcoming trip" that would be copyright infringement.

However, if you recorded the movie on Tivo, burned it onto a DVD and then copied it onto your handheld, that wouldn't be.

The internal contradictions of the system originally set up to encourage creativity and invention are perfectly evident here. Interposing the law into technical matters is just going to make for bad law.



I guess the article must have originated in PC World. What I read was "Copying Video to your Handheld," www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/20/AR2006042000230.html
in the Washington Post online.

[richough3]

To help prevent widespread piracy, I think it should be possible to purchase an electronic version of any book you buy at a greatly discounted rate or just to buy a non DRM electronic book for cost that is a little lower than hard or paper back costs. I think you would see the piracy because people want electronic versions of the books they purchase without having to pay for the same book twice and at a higher cost. Even movies come with an electronic version for a few dollars more, granted even those are DRM'd, which limits which devices can play them.

Have it so that when the book is purchased it is encoded and encrypted with your personal information, such as using the name from the purchasing credit card, so that if you distribute it illegaly, then it will be easily identified to the original owner. Also, embedded within the book, would be a set number of times you can generate a time limited version of your ebook via some installed software, so you can loan it to a friend for something like 30 days. I like this idea so I can loan books out so my friends don't mess up the spine of my paperback books trying to fold the pages around. Unlike MP3s, people won't be reading the same book all the time like they listen to the same music, so it's a bit different in how they function. People who read like to read wherever they are and whenever they want and with DRM, they would potentially be limited by device and duration of ownership which would definitely discourage some people to go the ebook route.

[Krystian Galaj]

Necroposting in 3.5 years dead thread?

When answering, be mindful of the age of this one