Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
Then strip the DRM and go rogue. Publishers are under no obligation - moral or legal - to offer lending.
|
Yes, or don't lend at all. I'm just pointing out that they are touting a "lending" feature that is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
It's not valid.
|
I find the term "valid" slightly disturbing in this context. Where I come from every opinion is. You disagree with it? Whole 'nother story, but that doesn't render their opinion "invalid".
Quote:
|
Libraries SHOULDN'T have an unlimited lending ability because the books are not FREE.
|
Well, that's open to debate. I can easily envision a model where compensation is largely determined by the number of times an ebook is borrowed, concurrently or not. And I for one agree, the current model really doesn't make much sense with digital files, it's an uphill battle to preserve decades-old business models that are on their way out.
Of course we need to compensate authors in some way and allow them to make a living off writing. I just don't think that the current approach will allow for that in the long run.
Quote:
|
Copyright and patents are in place so that society can benefit from folks being able to make a profession out of creating content.
|
I am not going to discuss the finer points here (it's the only "profession" that continues to generate income long after you're gone), but I have nothing against a fair and balanced copyright, in principle. On the contrary, I think it's necessary and required in a modern, information-based society like ours.