Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
"Violation" instead of "infringement" might be better:
You wouldn't violate his home.
You wouldn't violate him sexually.
Don't violate his copyright.
|
Actually, that might be a bit much; equating CI with any physical act has historically proven to be a No Sale with consumers.
I believe the connections to cable TV service are better. Unfortunately, no one has sympathy for cable companies, and the main thing keeping people from "stealing" cable signals is the threat of losing one's cable service... ironically, as much as people complain about the cable company, none of them are willing to risk the service they already have. Web access is about the same, though there are free web access points, so the threat isn't as severe.
So, if ebook creators/providers could be presented as a sympathetic entity that no one would want to steal from, you might be getting somewhere. You'd probably have to divorce them from the major publishers, which, being big corporations, won't be getting sympathy from anyone.
(I'm picturing a commercial, set in Victorian England, where we see a Bob Cratchit-type character working over his tiny desk, alternately rubbing his fingerless-gloved hands for warmth. At the end of the day, he trudges home, worry on his face. He pulls at his pockets, which are tellingly empty.
He arrives home, looking grim; work isn't good. Then his wife and kids greet him encouragingly and his wife brings him over to an alcove--let's say a NOOK
--where a modern computer sits. He logs on, checks his account, and sees that he's made a few-score ebook sales today. He looks at his wife and kids and says, "Thank God... we eat tonight!"
The voiceover says: "
Don't be stingy... let a guy earn a living. Don't take ebooks without paying for them.")