Quote:
Originally Posted by WT Sharpe
Just because you disagree with her position on this issue doesn't mean her ideas are "stupid". Thoughtful people can and do arrive at different conclusions about the ramifications of reselling, donating, and giving away ebooks.
|
I think we'll have to disagree here. The comment was made on the idea that if a book is gifted on then it's somehow wrong that the original author isn't compensated when the gift is made. What about paintings or prints - should the artist be paid every time it's gifted, or resold? How about a DVD or CD? If I give my copy of a DVD I no longer want to watch to a friend should I call up the studio and ask how much I owe them? And red herrings such as the easy duplication of digital files don't apply, the original question was framed in terms of deleting all owned copies on gift.
The concept of endless remuneration for a single copy of anything is not only stupid, it's pernicious and dangerous. It attacks the concept of "first sale", affects the property rights of anyone who buys anything and would seriously tilt the balance between consumer and producer that has existed for centuries. It's bad enough that special interests can buy legislation, acceptance of their concepts in mainstream thought is worse.
The more ideas such as this are allowed to be repeated unchallenged the more they become part of the collective consciousness and the more likely they are to affect expectations, legislation and practice. This is also true in the political debate, the religious debate and other debates. The constant repetition of the "no government regulation" mantra and the consequent repeal of Glass-Steagall restrictions is a large part of why the world is in such a mess at the moment.
I'm sure the OP is a nice, bright, genuine person, although some of the logic seems a bit muddled. It's the fact that such a person obviously accepts and can blandly put forth the concept of endless remuneration for a single copy that is so troubling. It reinforces the concerns outlined above.
So, I have no issue calling the idea, not the poster, not only stupid but pernicious and dangerous.