MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Lemurion · 03-19-2008, 07:30 AM

It sounds to me like I'm hearing a lot of "two wrongs make a right," and while three lefts do make a right, two wrongs don't.

We've always been charged again to purchase content in different formats. I have a 20 yr. old trade paper copy of DC's Watchmen graphic novel. I just paid $50 (I got a good deal) for the over-sized recolored hardcover "Absolute" edition. Just because I own one copy of the content doesn't give me the right to another for free.

Having said that, I don't like DRM either. It doesn't do a good job of its stated function (preventing piracy) and primarily harms legitimate customers rather than copyright infringers or illegal downloaders.

So what's the answer? Make legitimate content available at a reasonable price without undue restrictions. In the case of ebooks that means in a format that can be read on whatever device one has at the time-- and if you have two or more devices on whichever one you have with you.

One problem I see is that there's a large lobby group that has a vested interest in demonizing copyright infringement and some of their claims have gone so far as to become ludicrous. It's like they're applying the reductio ad absurdum to their own position.

The way I see it, there are two forms of copyright infringement which I think of as civil and criminal. What I think of as "civil" copyright infringement is primarily file-sharing and illegitimate downloading with no financial gain, where "criminal" copyright infringement is that done for profit such as selling truckloads of copied CDs and DVDs. Many content lobbyists appear to be trying to equate the two, and apply the appropriate penalties for the latter to the former. They are also seeking to convince the world that "civil" copyright infringement is a crime on the order of murder and kidnapping.

It hurts their case.

"Civil" copyright infringement is more like petty theft than grand theft, and should be treated as such. It is wrong and no amount of rationalization is going to make it right. Yes it's a minor crime in comparison, but that doesn't excuse it.

I've said this for a while now; the only way to get non-DRM content into the market is to prove to the providers that consumers will pay for it. Support retailers that offer it. Until then the "piracy" argument will trump all as far as the accountants are concerned.

Any solution that doesn't involve some sort of payment, whether direct with each transaction, or indirect such as a levy or advertisement, is not a solution.

Yes you can download illegal versions of many books instead of buying them, but it's the very thing that's doing the most to prevent the free availability of un-crippled legal content.

You get a lot better results with the carrot than the stick--especially when the other side relies entirely on the stick.

03-19-2008, 07:30 AM	#123
Lemurion eReader Posts: 2,750 Karma: 4968470 Join Date: Aug 2007 Device: Note 5; PW3; Nook HD+; ChuWi Hi12; iPad	It sounds to me like I'm hearing a lot of "two wrongs make a right," and while three lefts do make a right, two wrongs don't. We've always been charged again to purchase content in different formats. I have a 20 yr. old trade paper copy of DC's Watchmen graphic novel. I just paid $50 (I got a good deal) for the over-sized recolored hardcover "Absolute" edition. Just because I own one copy of the content doesn't give me the right to another for free. Having said that, I don't like DRM either. It doesn't do a good job of its stated function (preventing piracy) and primarily harms legitimate customers rather than copyright infringers or illegal downloaders. So what's the answer? Make legitimate content available at a reasonable price without undue restrictions. In the case of ebooks that means in a format that can be read on whatever device one has at the time-- and if you have two or more devices on whichever one you have with you. One problem I see is that there's a large lobby group that has a vested interest in demonizing copyright infringement and some of their claims have gone so far as to become ludicrous. It's like they're applying the reductio ad absurdum to their own position. The way I see it, there are two forms of copyright infringement which I think of as civil and criminal. What I think of as "civil" copyright infringement is primarily file-sharing and illegitimate downloading with no financial gain, where "criminal" copyright infringement is that done for profit such as selling truckloads of copied CDs and DVDs. Many content lobbyists appear to be trying to equate the two, and apply the appropriate penalties for the latter to the former. They are also seeking to convince the world that "civil" copyright infringement is a crime on the order of murder and kidnapping. It hurts their case. "Civil" copyright infringement is more like petty theft than grand theft, and should be treated as such. It is wrong and no amount of rationalization is going to make it right. Yes it's a minor crime in comparison, but that doesn't excuse it. I've said this for a while now; the only way to get non-DRM content into the market is to prove to the providers that consumers will pay for it. Support retailers that offer it. Until then the "piracy" argument will trump all as far as the accountants are concerned. Any solution that doesn't involve some sort of payment, whether direct with each transaction, or indirect such as a levy or advertisement, is not a solution. Yes you can download illegal versions of many books instead of buying them, but it's the very thing that's doing the most to prevent the free availability of un-crippled legal content. You get a lot better results with the carrot than the stick--especially when the other side relies entirely on the stick.