Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcard
What we are facing here is an interesting conundrum.
It's what happens when convenience and availability intersect.
I believe that authors should be compensated for their work. No doubt about it. Even software authors. Website authors. Press authors.
So let's ask a different question..
What's the difference between shifting format from paperback to ebook (or darknetting for the ebook you already own in paperback form) and using libprs500 to communicate with your Sony reader? Because in both cases, you are usurping an author. What's the difference between buying a subscription to USA Today and using Kovid's "News" function in libprs500 to scrape the site? Because in both cases, you are shifting formats.
I don't mean to call Kovid out, by any means.. but let's be careful when we throw around the term "lawbreakers" and "thief." The law as it stands right now (at least in the US) could call many of us that simply for using something to convert HTML to LRF.
Right now we have 1984 posted here on this website, and that's not out of copyright in the United States. Technically, we're "thieves" if we download that book.
So no, it's not black and white. It's all shades of gray. We content ourselves with using libprs500 out of a matter of convenience. It's worth considering that.
That said, I will always prefer to pay for products, and I have not owned my Reader long enough to really go out and find Darknet books, and I tend to be the "web author" type myself.. so.. I don't think I'll face the issue. But all the same, as I mentioned earlier.. I would consider doing such for the Chronicles of Narnia.
|
It is exactly black and white. The gray is from your own dreaming up reasons why your behavior is acceptable.
And yes, some of the products freely discussed and linked to on Mobile Read are created solely for the purpose of breaking the law and Mobile Read promotes them. I don't know what libprs500 does, so I'm not specifically talking about that program. But if the only thing it does is illegal, then it's illegal. If you're using it for illegal purposes, then you're using it for illegal purposes.
If 1984 is not out of copyright in the US then nobody in the US should be downloading it, maybe this website shouldn't be hosting it.
Here's the thing: You want to do something illegal, so you dream up reasons why it's ok. You don't want to just accept the fact that what you're doing is illegal because then you might have moral issues with it, so you have to dream up a reason why it's not wrong. Some people even seem to think the word "illegal" is a matter of opinion when in fact the law is the law. Morals are a bit more slippery. Of course there are those who will own up to their immorality and it won't bother them, they are not the ones making up excuses why illegal activities are acceptable.
Now you're saying "hey let's not call that illegal because then we'll have to call this stuff we all like to do illegal and that could get ugly." Well, stealing is ugly. I hope you choose to stop doing it. If you're going to keep doing it I hope you'll quit lying to yourself about it and accept responsibility for your own behavior.
You wouldn't want someone stealing your work, don't steal anyone else's.