|
View Poll Results: Is the Darknet unethical when the book is out of print? | |||
Yes, using the darknet is unethical. | 41 | 19.71% | |
No, anything that is out of print is fair game. | 142 | 68.27% | |
Not sure. | 25 | 12.02% | |
Voters: 208. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
08-24-2010, 04:01 PM | #1 |
Montreal wins Grey Cup!
Posts: 7,578
Karma: 31484197
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC
Device: Paperwhite, Kindles 10 & 4 and jetBook Lite
|
Do you consider it to be unethical...
Do you consider it to be unethical to download from the darknet a book which is under copyright but currently out of print in all legitimate forms?
PS - This is my first poll, so I am still learning how to do it properly. I believe I have set it so that the voters cannot be identified. Last edited by GA Russell; 08-24-2010 at 04:05 PM. |
08-24-2010, 04:03 PM | #2 |
curmudgeon
Posts: 1,481
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
My personal answer is "yes." As always, your mileage (and ethics) may vary.
|
Advert | |
|
08-24-2010, 04:06 PM | #3 |
Illiterate
Posts: 10,279
Karma: 37848716
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Sandwich Isles
Device: Samsung Galaxy S10+, Microsoft Surface Pro
|
Yes, but it doesn't prevent me from obtaining a book I want to read that is otherwise unavailable. And unavailable also includes paper.
|
08-24-2010, 04:14 PM | #4 |
Zealot
Posts: 129
Karma: 11430
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NC, USA
Device: my laptop
|
It's really unfortunate that so many great books go out of print and cannot be enjoyed by new readers, but the fact is, somebody owns those copyrights, and it's their decision to not make the text available. Hopefully, with the advent of ereaders, more and more of this stuff will be making a comeback in digital form.
--Maria |
08-24-2010, 04:21 PM | #5 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,395
Karma: 1358132
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Device: Palm TX, CyBook Gen3
|
I think preserving texts is more important than protecting copyright.
|
Advert | |
|
08-24-2010, 04:30 PM | #6 |
Guru
Posts: 900
Karma: 779635
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Device: Kindle 3, iPad 2 (but not for e-books)
|
This question is related to those in a poll that I posted some time ago, although not quite the same question. It would be interesting to do more/wider polls, but the threads often degenerated into in-fighting about what constituted theft etc.
Anyway, in that poll, ~40% thought it OK to copy something that you cannot purchase as an e-book. |
08-24-2010, 05:15 PM | #7 |
Addict
Posts: 298
Karma: 1537324
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chicago
Device: Nook, K3, Fire, Nexus 7
|
I see we have a bunch of scofflaws here.
j/k |
08-24-2010, 05:22 PM | #8 |
Teacher/Novelist
Posts: 632
Karma: 2274466
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nevada
Device: Nook STR, iPad
|
An author or copyright holder has the right to control the book, even if they choose to withhold it from print. Thankfully we have Smashwords and others so that they can get books out there if they wish.
|
08-24-2010, 05:24 PM | #9 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
Well, not necessarily. It can be that nobody knows who owns the copyright. It can also be that the the casue a book is not available is not an active decision but just inertia. Another reason for a book not being available is that a publisher does not think it is economically viable to re-publish it but they want to keep the book so they do not let the rights go back to the writer (by claiming it is still in print but for all practical purposes it is impossible to buy the book).
|
08-24-2010, 05:26 PM | #10 |
Country Member
Posts: 9,058
Karma: 7676767
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denmark
Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.
|
I answered yes, but I'm no saint!
|
08-24-2010, 05:27 PM | #11 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
Quote:
The question was about ethical things. And copyright was intended to make it possible for aothors to earn money for a limited time period. It was not intended for being able to hide a book away. So it is pretty unethical to hide it away, |
|
08-24-2010, 05:30 PM | #12 |
Book eater
Posts: 181
Karma: 2068
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: Kindle 3 G 3G (<-lol)
|
I voted for no. Because I think, if there is NO way you can get a book (digital or print) legally and they have it on darknet, then I don't see any reason it would be unethical to whats that word, "download" the said text. My point is that they don't intend to have another sale either way, so then whats wrong?
|
08-24-2010, 05:37 PM | #13 |
Guru
Posts: 900
Karma: 779635
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Device: Kindle 3, iPad 2 (but not for e-books)
|
There was some interesting research on morality which suggested that across cultures there were two broad types of view. One, that we might call "conservatives" emphasised the need to follow social rules in defining what was good/bad. The other, which one might call "liberal" (less common and more recent historically) emphasised whether individuals suffered in defining what was good/bad. An example they gave was gay marriage where the conservative view is bad (breaks the social rules), while the liberal view is good (avoids them suffering). It seemed an interesting analysis to me, and a way of trying to understand what might be going on with the opposing point of view in a moral argument.
In this context, it seems to me that we might have a similar split, with one group advocating following the rules, while another looks at (their view of) who suffers in determining whether something is OK or not. So, the conservative view is copying=bad in this case because it breaks a rule, while the liberal view is copying=ok because there is no alternative offered so nobody suffers (a loss of sale for example). |
08-24-2010, 05:49 PM | #14 |
Addict
Posts: 298
Karma: 1537324
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chicago
Device: Nook, K3, Fire, Nexus 7
|
I'm a fan of cheap, schlocky genre paperbacks (westerns, sci-fi, horror, etc). Unfortunately a lot of this stuff not only will never be e-published (is that a verb?) but will also never make it into the Darknet. I'd gladly donate some of my 'forgotten' paperbacks if there was an easy way for them to be converted and live on in the Darknet.
|
08-24-2010, 05:58 PM | #15 |
Guru
Posts: 973
Karma: 2458402
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: St. Louis
Device: Kindle Keyboard, Nook HD+
|
Meh, I would disagree with those labels. The original intent of the founding fathers was to have copyright limited to 14 years, I think, then renewable once.
Lifetime is probably fairer to those actually producing the work, though. The current life +75 system in the US is mostly due to Fritz Hollings, Senator from Disney (and Democrat/Liberal). |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unutterably Silly Is it unethical to be unethical? | Steven Lyle Jordan | Lounge | 47 | 09-12-2010 11:36 PM |