Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmon
Your "rational perspective" is rational only within the context of a market based analysis. Kovid's argument is that there are ethical obligations which transcend economic (or legal) analysis. You do not address that argument; you merely return to your economic analysis.
|
First, I'm constantly pointing out that you/we have the right to do whatever you want with PD content, except re-copyright it or plagiarize it. I mean this both legally and ethically.
Second, I'm saying that the ethical claims are bogus, and are a thin veneer over the emotional reaction.
Yet again: The PD seller is withholding information that costs me an extra $10 and benefits him. Tourneau is withholding information that costs me an extra $100 and benefits Tourneau. Seriously, what's the difference -- except that Tourneau is taking me for a much bigger ride? Why is Tourneau allowed to "rip me off" ten times worse than a PD bookseller?
Or, consider the following thought experiment. The government decides to levy a 10¢ tax on all public domain downloads of ebooks. Even if you give away the ebook for free, you still need to pay 10¢ every time a copy is downloaded from your site. If you sell the PD book through Amazon or Smashwords, they pass the cost on to you.
Henceforth, every distributor pays 10¢ every time they sell a PD ebook. It is no longer free; it carries a cost. Is it now acceptable to charge for the PD book? Does it now make sense that, since you do have a cost associated with the book, that you can charge, say, $1 for it?
If you think it is unacceptable to charge anything when the costs are $0.00 but acceptable to charge when the cost is $0.10, then that's an emotional reaction to
gratis, not a rational analysis.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Harmon
Assume that you are selling the ebook to your friend. Would you sell it without letting him know that it's a public domain ebook that he can get for free? I would hope not. So is your position that your ethical obligation to your friend is different than your ethical obligation to a stranger?
|
Let's say I walk into a bookstore with my friend. On one aisle are well-made hardcover PD classics, and in the next are cheap paperback versions of the same book. Is it my obligation to tell my friend in advance that the content is identical? Or is it insulting to assume she can't work it out for herself?
As to ebooks, I would tell my friend "
this version is free, and
that version costs a small amount but has better formatting and a bunch of essays, by the way
caveat emptor."
Plus, just about every ebook retailer is trumpeting free ebooks. Google has a big section on their books front page for "Best of the Free," Amazon has a separate "Free Bestsellers" and also lists all the other prices, etc etc. In a lot of cases, you kinda have to be working at it
not to know there's a free version available.
And while there will be much overlap, clearly the ethical obligations are certainly different between friend and friend, individual and stranger, seller and buyer.