MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

pdurrant · 03-02-2010, 06:26 AM

The question of how to describe the act of obtaining a first digital copy of copyright material without the copyright holder's permission has frequently appeared on Mobileread.

I think there are three groups on Mobileread. Those who insist on describing it as theft. Those who are equally insistent that this is inaccurate, and that it is really copyright infringement. And the vast majority who wish that the first two groups whould just shut up

.

I'm mostly in the second camp, although sometimes I join the third.

But it's just occurred to me that there might be room for compromise. Because copyright infringement applies to any unauthorised copying. If I buy an ebook, and then duplicate it 1,00 times, I have infringed on the copyright. For example, Amazon's terms of use for ebooks does not grant me the right to make backup copies of content, only "to keep a permanent copy of the applicable Digital Content ". (emphasis added)

So what's the difference between infringing copyright by burning a copy of a purchased ebook to CD-R for back-up, and infringing copyright by downloading a copy from some dodgy server on the internet?

It seems clear to me that there is a difference, and that calling both copyright infringement (although technically correct) doesn't reflect this difference. Infringing copyright by obtaining your first copy of a digital work is, it seems to me, qualitatively different to duplicating digital content locally.

Similarly, it seems clear to me that there's a qualitative difference between going into a bookshop and taking a book without paying for it, and downloading a digital copy of the book from some dodgy server on the internet. Calling both theft doesn't reflect this difference. (As well as being technically incorrect — I did say I was mostly in the second camp).

Is it possible to come up with a term for the act of obtaining digital copyright material without payment or the permission of the copyright holder that both groups could agree on, that distinguishes between innocuous copyright infringement on the one hand, and actual theft on the other?

Suggestions for a new term welcome. I'd prefer it not to be a term for an existing crime — so not piracy or bootlegging.

Or you can just argue that I'm completely wrong, and that theft or copyright infringement is the only sensible term to use.

I hope I don't regret posting this...

03-02-2010, 06:26 AM	#1
pdurrant The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠 Posts: 74,010 Karma: 315160596 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Norfolk, England Device: Kindle Oasis	Copyright infringement terminology The question of how to describe the act of obtaining a first digital copy of copyright material without the copyright holder's permission has frequently appeared on Mobileread. I think there are three groups on Mobileread. Those who insist on describing it as theft. Those who are equally insistent that this is inaccurate, and that it is really copyright infringement. And the vast majority who wish that the first two groups whould just shut up . I'm mostly in the second camp, although sometimes I join the third. But it's just occurred to me that there might be room for compromise. Because copyright infringement applies to any unauthorised copying. If I buy an ebook, and then duplicate it 1,00 times, I have infringed on the copyright. For example, Amazon's terms of use for ebooks does not grant me the right to make backup copies of content, only "to keep a permanent copy of the applicable Digital Content ". (emphasis added) So what's the difference between infringing copyright by burning a copy of a purchased ebook to CD-R for back-up, and infringing copyright by downloading a copy from some dodgy server on the internet? It seems clear to me that there is a difference, and that calling both copyright infringement (although technically correct) doesn't reflect this difference. Infringing copyright by obtaining your first copy of a digital work is, it seems to me, qualitatively different to duplicating digital content locally. Similarly, it seems clear to me that there's a qualitative difference between going into a bookshop and taking a book without paying for it, and downloading a digital copy of the book from some dodgy server on the internet. Calling both theft doesn't reflect this difference. (As well as being technically incorrect — I did say I was mostly in the second camp). Is it possible to come up with a term for the act of obtaining digital copyright material without payment or the permission of the copyright holder that both groups could agree on, that distinguishes between innocuous copyright infringement on the one hand, and actual theft on the other? Suggestions for a new term welcome. I'd prefer it not to be a term for an existing crime — so not piracy or bootlegging. Or you can just argue that I'm completely wrong, and that theft or copyright infringement is the only sensible term to use. I hope I don't regret posting this...