Declaration of Independence

[bill the smith]

Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that books are knowledge and that knowledge is forever free".

I am totally opposed to:
1. DMR on books.
2. Geographic limits on sales of ereaders.
3. Geographic limits on purchase of ebooks.
4. Americo-centrism as the defining basis of the availability of literature.
5. Making criminals of those who download/possess/read ebooks which are not in the Public Domain.
6. Unreal copyright laws.

This means that I support:
7. Software that cracks/strips DRM.
8. Free distribution of any book which is electronic format.
9. Access for all ereaders and ebooks without geographical limitation.
10. "Warez" or "pirate sites” that make ebooks available to all – books for every person in every country for free.

Is anyone else on board?

[HarryT]

Absolutely not concerning your point #10, no.

[bill the smith]

@HarryT
Well, it's a democracy so everyone has a right to their own view.
But I am very pleased that you are comfortable with 1 -9.

[HarryT]

You assume too much .

[bill the smith]

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius

[RobbieClarken]

You lost me at the first sentence. Knowledge might be free to distribute but it can be very expensive to create/discover in the first place. While I disagree with the current state of copyright law, if authors wish to try to recuperate the time they invest in writing by restricting access to their material (through DRM), then that is their choice.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by RobbieClarken

You lost me at the first sentence. Knowledge might be free to distribute but it can be very expensive to create/discover in the first place.

Absolutely right. It's like companies who illegally produce unlicenced versions of drugs. A drug might only cost pennies to manufacture, but it can cost hundreds of millions of $ to come up with in the first place. Unless the legal framework allows that money to be recouped, the result will inevitably be "no more new drugs". That is patent law, not copyright, but the principle is the same.

[HansTWN]

points 2,3,4 overlap. Cannot agree with 5,8, and 10.

[bill the smith]

@HarryT
The patented drugs is a poor example - as we are seeing in Third World countries where large numbers die because they country cannot afford to pay the US for drugs.
We are seeing examples of poor countries making their own version of US patented drugs and to hell with the US.
Knowledge is the same.
Everybody in the world has access to a limitless amount of information on the Internet.
Countries which are prohibited by book publishers from reading the latest literature should be able to read pirated copies. Particularly poor countries. If you stand back and look at it, international copyright is about preventing access by developing countries to knowledge and books. Piracy is a liberating force.
Why should the US dictate what I read? Screw them.
Obama should be looking after his relatives in Kenya by making literature (and medicine) available to them for free - not blocking it by US laws.

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that books are knowledge and that knowledge is forever free".

I am totally opposed to:
1. DMR on books.
2. Geographic limits on sales of ereaders.
3. Geographic limits on purchase of ebooks.
4. Americo-centrism as the defining basis of the availability of literature.
5. Making criminals of those who download/possess/read ebooks which are not in the Public Domain.
6. Unreal copyright laws.

This means that I support:
7. Software that cracks/strips DRM.
8. Free distribution of any book which is electronic format.
9. Access for all ereaders and ebooks without geographical limitation.
10. "Warez" or "pirate sites” that make ebooks available to all – books for every person in every country for free.

Is anyone else on board?

Fully agreed.
I hate that Kindle is only available in USA. No way that I would ever come to live to USA, even though there are a lot of cool things there.

And geographical restrictions are just asking for me to steal those books.
I have no way of buying them, unless I want to wait for them to be shipped across the Atlantic and paying extra for shipping which I don't need, I need only book. So I have to steal. Sometimes publishers are idiots.

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Absolutely right. It's like companies who illegally produce unlicenced versions of drugs. A drug might only cost pennies to manufacture, but it can cost hundreds of millions of $ to come up with in the first place. Unless the legal framework allows that money to be recouped, the result will inevitably be "no more new drugs". That is patent law, not copyright, but the principle is the same.

Drugs still cost ridiculous amounts of money, way over reasonable profit. If people can be saved by showing a finger to the greedy corporations, then I say - go for it. Drug companies still will come up with new drugs.

[bill the smith]

Go Fanas

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that books are knowledge and that knowledge is forever free".

I am totally opposed to:
1. DMR on books.
2. Geographic limits on sales of ereaders.
3. Geographic limits on purchase of ebooks.
4. Americo-centrism as the defining basis of the availability of literature.
5. Making criminals of those who download/possess/read ebooks which are not in the Public Domain.
6. Unreal copyright laws.

This means that I support:
7. Software that cracks/strips DRM.
8. Free distribution of any book which is electronic format.
9. Access for all ereaders and ebooks without geographical limitation.
10. "Warez" or "pirate sites” that make ebooks available to all – books for every person in every country for free.

Is anyone else on board?

1. Nope, I'm opposed to allowing only one DRM scheme on a device though (looks at Amazon)
2. Agree
3. Agree
4. No idea what you mean by this...
5. Nobody said I was a criminal because I download books I've bought...
6. What are unreal copyright laws? I do agree that today's laws are crazy.
7. Agree
8. Don't agree, unless you mean "free distribution which will compensate the creator", according to the (fair) copyright laws
9. Agree (but you already mentioned those at 2 and 3)
10. Don't agree. The creator should be compensated for his or her work. But all books should be available in electronic format, and either put up (by the creator or representative (publisher for instance) for a free download or to buy in a store. I don't care where, as long as it's officially available.

[bill the smith]

@Sweetpea
4 Nobody in the US knows what Americo-centrism is!
It means that all culture is owned by the US and nobody else has access to it unless the US decides that it is OK; ereaders are a good example.
5 Cute: the context is referrring to books that are downloaded without paying

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

@Sweetpea
4 Nobody in the US knows what Americo-centrism is!
It means that all culture is owned by the US and nobody else has access to it unless the US decides that it is OK; ereaders are a good example.
5 Cute: the context is referrring to books that are downloaded without paying

Well, I've not come across that term here in the Netherlands neither...

ok, 5: I don't agree. See point 8 and 10...