|
hmmm...to me this is a simply issue...it is fine to have a personal backup of any electronic content one has licensed. But there is no reason someone should be allowed an electronic copy of a book simply because one has the hard-copy on a shelf. Electronic copies are just a different edition of a book, as in hardback vs. paperback. But making a scanned copy of a hard-copy book as a personal backup might seem be fine to most of us...but really since one is changing the delivery system of the content, the author & parasites...errr, I mean...publishers, should have a valid complaint. But a photocopy as a backup should be fine, but likely much more expensive then just buying a new copy if ours is destroyed.
I bet if authors retained the e-rights to their works then made the content directly available at a reasonable price most of us would be happy to pay for the e-version even if we own the hard copy of our favs.
One problem is there is so much content with no current e-versions or even the hope of e-versions anytime in the near future. For me personally that is a problem as I can no longer hold books (or anything else) in my hands for more then a few moments at a time...hence I am a HUGE fan of the ebook options and increasing the selection of both devices and content...
We should all SUPPORT the authors efforts to get ebook versions out there for all of their works...and also be compensated for that edition of their works.
Beyond that all I really read here are circular arguments.
|