The morality of circumventing geographical restrictions only to buy cheaper ebooks

[TGS]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Which the seller does, in this case. They have used pre-approved checking methods to confirm that you are eligible to buy.

So the seller has acted properly in that they have have good reason to believe that you are eligible to buy. But if you have set out to deliberately deceive the seller as to your eligibility, and therefore induced them to sell to you in breach of their own agreements with their suppliers, can you be said to have acted equally properly?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by TGS

So the seller has acted properly in that they have have good reason to believe that you are eligible to buy. But if you have set out to deliberately deceive the seller as to your eligibility, and therefore induced them to sell to you in breach of their own agreements with their suppliers, can you be said to have acted equally properly?

Yes, distribution agreements are of no importance to me. Besides, an authorized seller offered to sell, I paid them, and received the goods. As I also mentioned, I fullfil the criteria, thus I am eligible. My iPaddress is in the country (via VPN) and I can give a valid US address. They never expressly ask: "are you an American citizen or resident currently residing in the US?" So I never made a false statement. Can't be more proper than that. Sorry, these attempts to make me feel like a pirate are futile. Why should I care that the publisher did not intend for Amazon (or whoever) to sell to me? I am not bound by their agreement, and if I fullfil above criteria, then everyone is happy --- author, publisher. and seller. Win-win-win.

[taming]

I have only looked at the Kobo Terms of Use, but I would not be surprised if other companies are similar. In the section titles "Registered Users" it states:

(a) provide true, accurate, current and complete information about yourself as prompted by any registration form(s) on the Service, including your geographical location and billing address (the "Registration Data"); and

(b) maintain and promptly update the Registration Data to keep it true, accurate, current and complete. If you provide any information that is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, Kobo has the right to suspend or terminate your account and refuse any and all current or future use of the Service (or any portion thereof);

I see this as Kobo doing its version of due diligence to assure the publishers, authors, and agents that have skin in the game that they are prepared to enforce things like geographic restrictions should violations of the agreement come to light. So, for example, if I choose to enter a non-Canadian address in my account information, thus giving me (for example) access to non-agency pricing (use of discount coupons now apply) in the US for Penguin and Random House titles, I do it at the risk of losing my ability to buy from Kobo in the future. I might lose access to downloading additional copies of my past purchases, as well.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by TGS

So the seller has acted properly in that they have have good reason to believe that you are eligible to buy. But if you have set out to deliberately deceive the seller as to your eligibility, and therefore induced them to sell to you in breach of their own agreements with their suppliers, can you be said to have acted equally properly?

I do not think so. It feels a bit immoral to me. And since you were going to buy the book it is the author that get less money. In the case when people download without paying anything books they would not have bought nobody looses any money. So comparing these two case circumventing geographical restrictions feels to me to be worse.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by tompe

I do not think so. It feels a bit immoral to me. And since you were going to buy the book it is the author that get less money. In the case when people download without paying anything books they would not have bought nobody looses any money. So comparing these two case circumventing geographical restrictions feels to me to be worse.

Not that old hat again. We already have established that the author not necessarily gets less money for US sales --- depends on the contract. Everybody is willing to sell at that given price to "US eligible" buyers. If they are trying to rip people off on the basis of national origin, well, then it is they who are wrong.

So let us ask, authors, publishers, and sellers who they prefer --- some illegal downloader or a real buyer??? I wouldn't be so sure anyone but the illegal downloader would feel that circumventing geographic restrictions is worse. Everybody would rather lose a few extra bucks than lose the whole amount and get nothing. I can't imagine any author embracing somebody who downloads a book for free over somebody who pays the price that the author is actually willing to sell at.

In the end if they really wanted to stop circumventing regional restrictions they could do so. But nobody is really interested in that, so they allow it and even make it very easy to do so. A few take it very seriously, why don't the others?

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Yes, distribution agreements are of no importance to me. Besides, an authorized seller offered to sell, I paid them, and received the goods. As I also mentioned, I fullfil the criteria, thus I am eligible.

A question: do you accept that what you're buying in this case is not a physical good but a license? I know that some people argue it's not a license and if that's your view - well I don't want to have that argument again but I think it is a license and that's why technically[*] I think it's infringement.

[*]again I don't think anyone's going to go after the individual end customer.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Not that old hat again. We already have established that the author not necessarily gets less money for US sales --- depends on the contract. Everybody is willing to sell at that given price to "US eligible" buyers. If they are trying to rip people off on the basis of national origin, well, then it is they who are wrong.

Why do you think there are regional restrictions? Of course it is because the author earns more money in that case. "rip off"? It is just the market.

But since you have so strong opinions about how wrong it is to download something without permission this discussion will not lead any further since you will never accept that maybe your own behavior (if you on purpose lie to companies to be able to buy cheaper) is on the same level.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by latepaul

A question: do you accept that what you're buying in this case is not a physical good but a license? I know that some people argue it's not a license and if that's your view - well I don't want to have that argument again but I think it is a license and that's why technically[*] I think it's infringement.

[*]again I don't think anyone's going to go after the individual end customer.

We are buying a license, of course. But if I fullfill the criteria so they sell to me (IP address, billing address, etc) therefore I have a legal license. Anyway, it is rather ridiculous trying to make paying customers look worse than people who download for free. Even if we technically accept infringement (which I absolutely do not), then it would be infringement on a very different level of severity. This whole thread is more like an attempt to justify piracy than anything else.

[latepaul]

Fair enough. Thanks for responding.

[athenat]

Honestly I don't do it because I'm lazy...and there are enough bargains, coupons and sales going on around to justify it. But I don't condone anyone who does. Frankly if I have to think about publisher, author, mass production, what Canada is selling vs US, I might as well forget about reading the book. And what's the deal with selling an "ebook" at a lesser price in one geographical location vs another? I mean did the content of the book change? did it take more or less technological steps to produce in India vs France??? I mean seriously? Authors and publishers should think "morally" about the consumers as well, not just the other way around.

[Soldim]

Originally Posted by TGS

So the seller has acted properly in that they have have good reason to believe that you are eligible to buy. But if you have set out to deliberately deceive the seller as to your eligibility, and therefore induced them to sell to you in breach of their own agreements with their suppliers, can you be said to have acted equally properly?

I would argue that, yes I handle properly. As far as I know there are neither laws nor moral objections against using VPN. Heck, my employer even obliges my to use VPN for any professional activities.

I have bank accounts with associated credit cards in four different countries. It makes traveling easier and spreads financial risk. Why would living in some place restrict me in the use of those credit cards?

Let's face it, both economies and societies have gone global, companies, people and especially products move around constantly. No reason why companies and the elites should profit of globalization and Joe Sixpack not. I for sure wouldn't have any moral qualms with regards to avoiding georestrictions.

However, as I mentioned earlier in this tread, the time spend to set up accounts in other countries (both bank and VPN) is in my opinion not worth the time to save a couple of bucks -- I rather spend that time defending the practice here on MR

[abookreader]

Originally Posted by athenat

Honestly I don't do it because I'm lazy...and there are enough bargains, coupons and sales going on around to justify it. But I don't condone anyone who does. Frankly if I have to think about publisher, author, mass production, what Canada is selling vs US, I might as well forget about reading the book. And what's the deal with selling an "ebook" at a lesser price in one geographical location vs another? I mean did the content of the book change? did it take more or less technological steps to produce in India vs France??? I mean seriously? Authors and publishers should think "morally" about the consumers as well, not just the other way around.

Well just to add fuel to the fire, sometimes it is a different Publisher.

For instance the book I was considering.

Publisher A has the rights to sell in the US with a release date next week. Right now the pre-order price is $10.99 on Amazon.

Publisher B has the rights to sell in the UK and the book has been for sale for over a week now. Right now the price on Amazon is $5.41

So if I hop onto a VPN and purchase giving a UK address. Amazon will get paid (likely less). The author will get paid (probably less but it depends on the contract.) Publisher A loses a sale. I'm supposed to be their customer given my passport. Publisher B gains a sale, they aren't supposed to get anything from me.

It still doesn't bother me though I understand the position of others take that it is morally wrong and against my Amazon TOS to deceive using IPs and different addresses. I just don't agree with their opinion.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by abookreader

Well just to add fuel to the fire, sometimes it is a different Publisher.

For instance the book I was considering.

Publisher A has the rights to sell in the US with a release date next week. Right now the pre-order price is $10.99 on Amazon.

Publisher B has the rights to sell in the UK and the book has been for sale for over a week now. Right now the price on Amazon is $5.41

So if I hop onto a VPN and purchase giving a UK address. Amazon will get paid (likely less). The author will get paid (probably less but it depends on the contract.) Publisher A loses a sale. I'm supposed to be their customer given my passport. Publisher B gains a sale, they aren't supposed to get anything from me.

It still doesn't bother me though I understand the position of others take that it is morally wrong and against my Amazon TOS to deceive using IPs and different addresses. I just don't agree with their opinion.

Seriously, publisher A should get their act together and sell for a reasonable price. And what does publisher A mean to you or me, anyway?

[danicca]

What's interesting is that similar rules don't apply for print books. Even if ebook is geographically restricted, I could probably order print book. Wouldn't the second publisher and author lose the money in that case as well?

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

The same (sometimes) happens between "Dutch Dutch" and "Belgian Dutch", even though the biggest difference between the two languages is the usage and pronounciation of loan words.

The Dutch are not scared of loan words. Nowadays, we have so many (especially English ones), that people stare at you when you use the "proper" Dutch word. Over here, nobody says "verwerkingseenheid" if you mean a "processor". (The computer part, I mean.) When talking about violence during soccer games, nobody says "voetbalvandaal"; everybody just says "hooligan".

The Belgians have much more "proper Dutch" replacements for loan words, and if they don't, they often pronounce the word as it would have been pronounced if it had been a Dutch word.

So belgian are to dutch what Canadians are to french.

They try to get french words, but most of time they sucks, and more importantly, they wait until the English words are in the common language to create the french words, so most people keeps on using the English words.