Quote:
Originally Posted by anamardoll
Can we talk about Harry Potter for a bit? I would like that...
|
I'd like to tell people to "suck it up and
not read Harry Potter--personal preference--but I'll refrain. After all, I have the complete
Doc Savage collection, so the old saw about stones and glass houses applies...
At any rate, your post really didn't involve illegal downloads, since none were involved. As far as entitlement, denying shifted media to someone who is physically challenged and using strictly for themselves is hardly the spirit of the entitlement argument; but it's true that the
letter of the law can sometimes preclude the option of format-shifting, even for PCs, or at least make it difficult.
Usually, when faced with such a situation (and no obvious alternatives, like ebook copies available), the law tends to side with the PC and dismiss the case, barring some obvious illegal component to it (the books were stolen, the copies were resold, the scanning company redistributed them elsewhere, etc).
The PC tend to be in a legal limbo in some instances, where the products and services of the many cannot always be adequately repackaged for the needs of the few. In some rare cases, it is decided that certain facilities don't need to be made available for the PC because of the extreme difficulty in doing so; in most cases, arrangements will be made where possible.
And even the PC can exhibit a sense of entitlement, though I wouldn't label this particular example so. In fact, I'd say this example really doesn't reflect an entitlement conflict at all.