Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I think that it becomes that at the point at which you actually READ the book, Bill. I don't think that one can say that downloading data which simply sits on a hard disk is taking money away from anybody (although it may well be illegal, depending on where you live).
|
Harry,
I guess it depends on how you look at it. The way I look at it is this; I pay to take possession of a book in either paper or electronic form. What I do with that book afterwards (within reason and the bounds of fair use) is up to me. I have books I have purchased but never read (though no ebooks yet.. but I am sure it is a matter of time) and I am sure that is true of many of the people here.
So to that extent, merely taking possession and having the ability to use it are what you pay for, not the use itself (Since books have not yet adopted anything like a pay per view system). Therefore, I don't really see the distinction in claiming that one has not read the book that one downloaded. Sure you might not have read it yet, but it doesn't mean you never will.
It is reasonable, I think, therefore for the author and publisher of a work to expect renumeration from said work upon download, not upon reading.
In any case, this is all splitting hairs. People download from the darknet precisely because they want to get access to works without paying for them; sure they may download 1000 books they never intend to read for every one they do, but they are still downloading books they intend to read and not to pay for.
--
Bill