MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - interesting NYT article on "copyright morality"

nairbv · 01-01-2008, 09:03 AM

Trenien:

I completely agree, one downloaded song is not a dollar taken from itunes or anyone else. 99% of the time the person would not have gone down to the CD shop otherwise to buy that particular CD, so no-one lost anything. suing someone for $40,000 because they have 40,000 songs on an ipod is stupidity. Maybe the price point is wrong for services like itunes. I think most people would spend a hundred bucks for a music collection. If it costs $40,000 they'll steal it. If it cost a hundred bucks maybe they'd at least be more inclined to pay. If it cost a hundred bucks and people didn't "steal," then the music industry would make more money. If they "stole" an ipod worth of music they probably actually cost the industry about a hundred bucks no matter how much music they got.

but... when the music/books are all available for free on the internet (and decent e-ink readers exist), the music/book stores and authors who write for profit will be out of business out of lack of incentive of customers to ever walk down to the music store and pay. When the content is only available for free, we don't have a backup plan to direct any money into the artists. In this sense, it will deprive the artists of motivating income. Sure, maybe someone buys a piece once before spreading it, but that's not going to fund heavy investment into art.

You can argue that people will write anyways, but that's a separate argument. You can't logically say that the author will earn just as much money when his book is free on the internet, as if that same book was for sale on a bookshelf in a bookstore. Claiming that someone buying one copy once initially, as if one copy at a $20 cover price represents the entire investment to put the book on the shelf, is not a remotely logical argument against any point, so why do you even bother saying it?

I mean, maybe you're right, ... maybe to some extent money isn't necessary. Maybe the guy who wrote his novel in 30 hours and wants to be paid for it wrote crap. I don't know what he wrote. Maybe the exceptional authors would write anyways. We don't know, but that is a valid discussion to have. discussions of the morals of whether or not someone owns that data or can sell it doesn't make any difference. I don't believe in any kind of morality, but claiming that the author was paid because someone bought one copy once is obvious fallacy.

Fewer such books will certainly appear on the shelves to copy in the first place pretty soon if they don't find a way to derive revenue from them. That doesn't mean I expect people not to copy books. I've done it myself page by page at a photocopy shop in mexico. I don't care about silly morals. What am I gonna do? hunt down the author and mail him a buck? Maybe I can claim that the author didn't lose anything, since I couldn't have bought the book otherwise. Does that make me feel better? I never felt bad about it to begin with. If everyone had done that though with every book ever produced, ... that particular book certainly never would have been written in the first place (it required some somewhat expensive research that couldn't have been paid for), and it was an important book for me.

It will be interesting, ... and I don't think you're entirely wrong about the outcome, but you don't really seem to care either. Certainly *someone* will still write *something,* and no I don't really care that much if random kids book authors make millions of dollars... Even harry potter books though have huge societal value in motivating a younger generation to actually read something, and I'm still a little nervous about where we'll end up without such stuff. I've taught kids, and I know how much better off they were for the existence of harry potter novels.

This will at a bare minimum certainly change the type of writing that people do. I read that there was a time when publishers paid authors by the page. They certainly wrote more long-winded books in that day. Think about how people can derive profit from their writing (since profit will always be a motivator). Think about which directions the new motivations will steer them. Do we like these directions? I don't know. What are they? blogs with ads? books by the chapter (with ads)? books with references to products like when the teenage mutant ninja turtles order dominoes pizza? books only coming from tenured professors and grad students on grants? will such books take away from time that would otherwise be spent on other research? how will that impact society as a whole? childrens books written by teachers who need material... books that they can't convince the kids to read because no movie was made about it? maybe text book development will have to be paid for by government agencies or else schools will lack algebra books? Maybe only rich people will be able to afford to write novels?

And then we should discuss what affects new motivations (or lack thereof) will have on the quality, volume, and style of authorship that becomes available to us. It could be a change for the better, and if so this could radically boost our advancement as a civilization. If it's a change for the worse though, .... we could be approaching a long period of stagnation... or even just dumb books about how great brand x pizza or coca cola is. (little do you know I'm being paid to make those references! mmm... I think I'm gonna go drink a ..... :-P)

01-01-2008, 09:03 AM	#233
nairbv Connoisseur Posts: 88 Karma: 15 Join Date: Nov 2007 Device: still looking for an ebook reader device	Trenien: I completely agree, one downloaded song is not a dollar taken from itunes or anyone else. 99% of the time the person would not have gone down to the CD shop otherwise to buy that particular CD, so no-one lost anything. suing someone for $40,000 because they have 40,000 songs on an ipod is stupidity. Maybe the price point is wrong for services like itunes. I think most people would spend a hundred bucks for a music collection. If it costs $40,000 they'll steal it. If it cost a hundred bucks maybe they'd at least be more inclined to pay. If it cost a hundred bucks and people didn't "steal," then the music industry would make more money. If they "stole" an ipod worth of music they probably actually cost the industry about a hundred bucks no matter how much music they got. but... when the music/books are all available for free on the internet (and decent e-ink readers exist), the music/book stores and authors who write for profit will be out of business out of lack of incentive of customers to ever walk down to the music store and pay. When the content is only available for free, we don't have a backup plan to direct any money into the artists. In this sense, it will deprive the artists of motivating income. Sure, maybe someone buys a piece once before spreading it, but that's not going to fund heavy investment into art. You can argue that people will write anyways, but that's a separate argument. You can't logically say that the author will earn just as much money when his book is free on the internet, as if that same book was for sale on a bookshelf in a bookstore. Claiming that someone buying one copy once initially, as if one copy at a $20 cover price represents the entire investment to put the book on the shelf, is not a remotely logical argument against any point, so why do you even bother saying it? I mean, maybe you're right, ... maybe to some extent money isn't necessary. Maybe the guy who wrote his novel in 30 hours and wants to be paid for it wrote crap. I don't know what he wrote. Maybe the exceptional authors would write anyways. We don't know, but that is a valid discussion to have. discussions of the morals of whether or not someone owns that data or can sell it doesn't make any difference. I don't believe in any kind of morality, but claiming that the author was paid because someone bought one copy once is obvious fallacy. Fewer such books will certainly appear on the shelves to copy in the first place pretty soon if they don't find a way to derive revenue from them. That doesn't mean I expect people not to copy books. I've done it myself page by page at a photocopy shop in mexico. I don't care about silly morals. What am I gonna do? hunt down the author and mail him a buck? Maybe I can claim that the author didn't lose anything, since I couldn't have bought the book otherwise. Does that make me feel better? I never felt bad about it to begin with. If everyone had done that though with every book ever produced, ... that particular book certainly never would have been written in the first place (it required some somewhat expensive research that couldn't have been paid for), and it was an important book for me. It will be interesting, ... and I don't think you're entirely wrong about the outcome, but you don't really seem to care either. Certainly someone will still write something, and no I don't really care that much if random kids book authors make millions of dollars... Even harry potter books though have huge societal value in motivating a younger generation to actually read something, and I'm still a little nervous about where we'll end up without such stuff. I've taught kids, and I know how much better off they were for the existence of harry potter novels. This will at a bare minimum certainly change the type of writing that people do. I read that there was a time when publishers paid authors by the page. They certainly wrote more long-winded books in that day. Think about how people can derive profit from their writing (since profit will always be a motivator). Think about which directions the new motivations will steer them. Do we like these directions? I don't know. What are they? blogs with ads? books by the chapter (with ads)? books with references to products like when the teenage mutant ninja turtles order dominoes pizza? books only coming from tenured professors and grad students on grants? will such books take away from time that would otherwise be spent on other research? how will that impact society as a whole? childrens books written by teachers who need material... books that they can't convince the kids to read because no movie was made about it? maybe text book development will have to be paid for by government agencies or else schools will lack algebra books? Maybe only rich people will be able to afford to write novels? And then we should discuss what affects new motivations (or lack thereof) will have on the quality, volume, and style of authorship that becomes available to us. It could be a change for the better, and if so this could radically boost our advancement as a civilization. If it's a change for the worse though, .... we could be approaching a long period of stagnation... or even just dumb books about how great brand x pizza or coca cola is. (little do you know I'm being paid to make those references! mmm... I think I'm gonna go drink a ..... :-P)