Giggleton, much like Tara of "My Immortal" fame, I can't tell if you're an amazing troll, or just really, obstinately sincere in your misguidedness. Either way, you've referenced librarian obsolescence as a support for your argument; that is not on, sir.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Giggleton
Yes, compensation to the creator is needed.
But that does not answer my question about why I should waste the librarians time and energy with my book request when I can click a button and have the book delivered in seconds.
One does not follow the other, the librarian is not needed to compensate the creator.
|
It's not a waste of our time and energy to process an inter-library loan or a hold request because
that's what we get paid to do. That's just us doing our bloody jobs, and we'd like to keep doing them, thanks. One of the main points of librarians and libraries is that the system compensates the creator on behalf of people who can't afford to (or don't want to), but who still want/need access to information. And, yeah, apparently we are necessary since you're not going to be doing the compensation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Giggleton
My motive is to read whatever I want, a digital archive of all texts, subsidized by tax dollars would be a good thing. Why do you think it is not?
|
You've just described...wait for it...A LIBRARY. Granted, not everything is available digitally yet, but just give Google time. I don't think a single person in this thread will say that libraries aren't a good thing. You just don't want to avail yourself of them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Giggleton
And if their work is obsolete or redundant? Should they still be compensated?
|
Um, yes. Because we're trained to do the legwork and to get it done legally in ways that compensate the original creator. Also because there are things we can access that you just can't. Because those taxes that subsidize our field help pay for access to those things. Such as digital copies of many scholarly journals, or things that just aren't digitized yet. Believe it or not, not everything is available on the internet. Libraries and librarians are far from obsolete, whatever pop culture might have to say about it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Giggleton
What I mean is, if we pay taxes for librarians, why not just cut out the middleman so to speak and send the money to the creator?
|
1) Because people won't always compensate the creator. As you have made so very obvious.
2) Because those taxes also allow libraries to buy things that the average person cannot afford to access. Textbooks and journal subscriptions that cost thousands of dollars, for example.
3) Because even if all of the library taxes were sent to the various creators to compensate them directly, it wouldn't be enough for everyone who contributed to have their own copy of whatever the material was. In order for everyone to have fair and equal access to the materials that were paid for, people would have to share them. Oh, wait, that's already how libraries work!
4) Because those taxes that people pay, which fund libraries, make it so that people who are too poor to have internet connections or books still gain access to information. If there were no taxes to fund libraries, and thus no libraries, we'd end up back in a society in which only people above a certain income level were able to do research and access information.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by howyoudoin
Giggleton, for once you might want to admit that all you want is to download books for free, never pay for them if you could get away with it, and are trying to make inane arguments to make it seem you're not just a cheapskate for doing so.
|
Seriously, this. If you want to pirate stuff, then pirate stuff; just admit that's what you're doing and move on.