Quote:
Originally Posted by 46jimbo
We should be able to do exactly the same as what we do with the physical paper book. That means that I can lend it to you, give it to my mother or sell it in a garage sale. But only one time. And I should also delete my copy of the book.
Is this ethical?
|
Since it's not a physical book, why "should" any such thing be true? Just because you can't simultaneously loan someone a physical book and still have it at home, why "should" you delete your digital copy if you give/lend it to someone else?
I said I wouldn't get into it, but I'll just get into it a little tiny bit. Trying to apply existing copyright laws to digital items is absurd. The laws need to be rewritten completely, from scratch, with only two basic purposes (the same purposes that fueled the first copyright act in England in the 1700s):
-To ensure that artists are compensated fairly for their art such that they are motivated to continue creating
-To prevent unscrupulous third parties from profiting from the artist's work without his/her authorization
That's it. That doesn't necessarily mean a 1:1 ratio of consumption to payment. It doesn't necessarily mean you can't make your own (free digital) copies and spread them around. Any system (or set of laws) that can provide the two necessary points above can be considered, but beyond that, the fewer limitations the better.
If we can fairly compensate artists, and prevent commercial piracy, while still embracing the vast number of benefits that come with DRM-free, shareable, copyable, transferrable files, why should we deny the consumer such conveniences?
Before flaming me, please note the "if" at the beginning of that sentence. If it can't be done, it can't be done. I personally think it can, but I won't get into why or how, I'm sure there are loads of threads out there that cover the issue from both sides. But everyone should agree with the above "if/then" statement. If you don't, please feel free to elaborate.