Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon
Nope, fixed it again. "Taking something" implies that you are depriving somebody of a "thing". This is not the case in copyright infringement, that is precisely why it is not classed as theft - it does not deprive anybody of a tangible object.
|
I believe this is one of the root reasons for so much of the disagreement here: Whether or not an e-book represents something tangible. Many (like Lexicon) apparently maintain that an e-book is NOT tangible, and therefore not bound by the laws of tangible objects. This is fine, because there are other laws that can be applied to electronic files, to wit:
I see e-books as being more akin to broadcasts of a television program: While not a tangible object,
per se, it still represents a specific, copywritten and protected work, and those who access them are still limited by law to what they are allowed to do with them--for instance, I cannot tape an episode of "Lost," then charge people to come to a private venue and watch those episodes, nor to make multiple copies of that tape and give them away,
even for free... those uses are, by U.S. definition,
illegal.
Downloading e-books that are meant to be paid for, without paying for them, is like pirating a cable signal without paying for it (and YES, I deliberately used the word "pirate," as that phrase is already used commonly in U.S. cable television for illegally obtaining cable signals, and I see no reason to dance around the word now). Accessing a cable signal that someone else has "pirated" makes you no less culpable for accessing it... if caught, you are considered as guilty as the person who made the cable signal available illegally, since it is presumed that you knew the signal was illegally offered.
Many of the discussions, debates and brickbat-throwing we have entertained (and endured) on this site have been rehashed and largely worked out in the television field regarding the handling, broadcasting, and profiting off of individual programs and series. IMO we would be smart to consider many of their solutions with regards to e-books, and to consider e-books NOT as "intangible" versions of paper-bound objects, but as electronically-distributed items of copywritten entertainment, with understood laws and permissions attached. I do believe that, eventually, this is exactly how e-books will be considered by law and practice, and how we will be inclined to deal with them.
Obviously there are differences between e-books and TV shows, most notably in the communications mediums involved. But there are also enough similarities to provide answers to most of the questions of access, distribution, payment, theft, piracy, etc, that we've discussed here. I think we should give those similarities a serious look, with an idea of finding the true common ground to evaluate this issue.