View Single Post
Old 06-20-2022, 06:48 PM   #13
SteveEisenberg
Grand Sorcerer
SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,435
Karma: 43514536
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: near Philadelphia USA
Device: Kindle Kids Edition, Fire HD 10 (11th generation)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth View Post
Copyright is about having 100% control of copying, thus selling.
In democracies, you can’t stop a library, or an individual you don’t like, from buying a paper copy.

So if an organization you’d rather not have your book — say, a library, or a harsh critic, or an organization that wants to create a braille version for free distribution to the visually impaired, wants your book, I think you should be required to sell it to them.

My problem with the Maryland law is vagueness, and that having different rules in small jurisdictions makes it too complicated for publishers. Ideally, there should be international copyright rules.

If somebody wants to stop all library access to an eBook sold to individuals, I don’t think international, or regional, laws should respect that. And, at least for the visually impaired, licensing terms should be quite liberal.
SteveEisenberg is offline   Reply With Quote