Misleading Metaphors That Drive The War On Online Sharing

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I'm so disappointed that this topic has gone sour; we're back to the same old "ebooks should be free!" "copyright is BAAAD!" "It's Disney's fault!" parroting-- including disagreement of whether or not there actually is a problem--and not discussing the topic at hand.

I'm done trying to steer this ship back on course, so: Have fun in the rocks ahead! I'm just gonna borrow this here dinghy...

Steve, I did try to offer metaphors and slogans, along with compromise positions. Somehow nobody ever responded to one of them....

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by elcreative

And that is exactly what you and like-minded allies want... a free lunch, ownership of everything whether you created it or someone else did... actually I never even mentioned copyright in this context... I was simply putting a hypothetical case in which I wanted creative control over my own work and it required production in a specific form because that form was intrinsic to the production... apparently that doesn't matter either if YOU want it then that's your right, nothing immoral with distorting someone else's work and vision as long as you have your rights - typical 21st century attitude, all rights and no responsibilities...

According to you, what are my rights as a paying customer? None? Why should I let you have Tax-free property? Nobody in the physical has property that cannot be subject to taxation. Or registered. Shucks, ever guns in the US have serial numbers on them. Is it too much to file for a copyright for it to be effective? Even in the days of the Homestead Act, you had to do things to get the title to the free land you were claiming.

[Quexos]

LOL I did not even remember that you'd put me on ignore for whatever reason. I'm not vindictive like you. By all means, keep me there.
It's you who need to get real, the world is not a place that you can control and where you decide who gets what and where. If you don't think global, then don't complain that some stuff ends up in the darknet or whatever people call that place.

Originally Posted by elcreative

Rubbish... if I produce an item of artwork that requires being in a certain physical form then that is my right - it's my artwork - if you don't like it in that form... tough, make your own artwork... I'm not limiting its availability to anyone but if it's put in another form then it no longer represents the intrinsic idea... nobody is entitled to have everything in this world in any form that they choose... get real... you just reminded me why I put you on ignore originally...

[Quexos]

Really ?
I never realized how powerful the European government was. We are so powerful that we can tell American book sellers (which are totally out of European jurisdiction) to whom they can or cannot sell online.

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You are looking at it all wrong. Nobody wishes NOT to sell you a book. Amazon and others from the US are contractually obligated not to sell to Europe. And your European governments want to collect those big VAT and other taxes. So, it is partially the European social services (financed by your high taxes) that prevents worldwide sales. And most of Europe has legal price fixing for books. It is that European governments and book sellers DON'T want you to buy in the US but locally at higher prices.

There definitely are but I'm not sure it pleases American sellers

Originally Posted by HansTWN

The American sellers would love to take your money. And, of course, there are easy way around regional restrictions.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

What you don't get that is is NOT cool to leave people out. You made up a fictional book with all sorts of fictional reasons as to why someone should not be allowed to format shift. As soon as people bring up very valid points as to the entire segment of the population that you are making a POINT to leave out - and now it's that "I didn't say that." The fact is that digital is making EVERYTHING assessable. My blind cousin has an iPhone and a Kindle. Just because your fictional book didn't take into account those people with disabilities is no reason to get all huffy.

Just because the tem I talked about was hypothetical doesn't mean such items don't exist... I have a book that is designed to showcase someone's design ideas using specific typography, hand made paper (with more design elements in it) and artwork - each page has a single letter of the alphabet on it in a different typeface... how do you make that accessible to a blind person??? Hey,I know let's OCR it and/or convert to speech, that'll be fascinating and really put the whole experience across - "A, B, C, D, E..."

What about art books and photography books - they're PRINTED, there's NO texture to be handled... sticking it on a computer screen doesn't make it accessible and just to repeat, simply because my discussion point was hypothetical doesn't mean that there aren't many things that can't be made equal opportunity accessible simply because we want them to be... I'm NOT trying to leave out sections of the population, the real world does that and wishing it wasn't so doesn't change a damn thing unless you want to make any expression, that can't be accessed by everybody, illegal - way to go... and you were the one who got huffy because I said that there were artisitic expressions that couldn't be equally accessed by people who may be differently enabled...

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

According to you, what are my rights as a paying customer? None? Why should I let you have Tax-free property? Nobody in the physical has property that cannot be subject to taxation. Or registered. Shucks, ever guns in the US have serial numbers on them. Is it too much to file for a copyright for it to be effective? Even in the days of the Homestead Act, you had to do things to get the title to the free land you were claiming.

But if you don't like this hypothetical work in its specific format then you don't have to be a paying customer... go and buy something you do like and register your displeasure by refusing to purchase... simple, that's what freedom is about...

And that's my final comment to let the OP have his thread back... never intended the major hijack but some people just went ballistic after misreading/misinterpreting what I actually wrote...

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by elcreative

But if you don't like this hypothetical work in its specific format then you don't have to be a paying customer... go and buy something you do like and register your displeasure by refusing to purchase... simple, that's what freedom is about...

Or buy it, and change it however you like. The buyer doesn't have the right to sell a copied version, but in the US, they have the right to photocopy it, or tear the pages out in order to read them on a light table, or use them to make paper mache vases by plastering them over balloons. And the buyer can sell those balloon vases. Can dye the paper before reading--and sell the dyed version when done.

You get to decide how to *present* your art, not how the buyer experiences it. If you don't want it experienced in ways you dislike, don't sell it. If it would be an insult to your art to have it "misused," then you need to keep it and just display it under conditions you're happy with.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Or buy it, and change it however you like. The buyer doesn't have the right to sell a copied version, but in the US, they have the right to photocopy it, or tear the pages out in order to read them on a light table, or use them to make paper mache vases by plastering them over balloons. And the buyer can sell those balloon vases. Can dye the paper before reading--and sell the dyed version when done.

You get to decide how to *present* your art, not how the buyer experiences it. If you don't want it experienced in ways you dislike, don't sell it. If it would be an insult to your art to have it "misused," then you need to keep it and just display it under conditions you're happy with.

The operative word being "buyer". Somebody must buy it in the creator's chosen format first. Then they can change it, their singular copy. If the creator only sells it in one format, than you can only be a buyer if you buy it in that format.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by elcreative

My hypothetical never mentioned a story to be enjoyed, it was an artistic concept... there are other sorts of books than those that have stories...

Your hypothetical never mentioned that there wasn't a story to be enjoyed. In fact you gave as an example the Book of Kells which does have a story.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Your hypothetical never mentioned that there wasn't a story to be enjoyed. In fact you gave as an example the Book of Kells which does have a story.

If you read the whole damn thread then you'd have seen that the Book of Kells was a discussion point relating to MrsJoseph's comments on how blind people could appreciate artwork by touch etc... it came in well down the thread from the original hypothetical... and whether it is a story, history or the Truth depends on your personal viewpoint as it's primarily the four Gospels...

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by elcreative

If you read the whole damn thread then you'd have seen that the Book of Kells was a discussion point relating to MrsJoseph's comments on how blind people could appreciate artwork by touch etc... it came in well down the thread from the original hypothetical... and whether it is a story, history or the Truth depends on your personal viewpoint as it's primarily the four Gospels...

I applaud your ability to see into the future. MrsJoseph's comment on how blind people could appreciate artwork by touch etc. came after your mention of the Book of Kells.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I applaud your ability to see into the future. MrsJoseph's comment on how blind people could appreciate artwork by touch etc. came after your mention of the Book of Kells.

Whoops, you're right... this thread has gone on too long and MrsJoseph immediately responded to my comment with her remarks about the sensory deprived etc but you still miss the point I was making that Kells isn't important for the words but the illustrations AND it still came some point after my original hypothetical, neither referencing stories...

[Quexos]

Right said Fred

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

You get to decide how to *present* your art, not how the buyer experiences it. If you don't want it experienced in ways you dislike, don't sell it. If it would be an insult to your art to have it "misused," then you need to keep it and just display it under conditions you're happy with.

[Freeshadow]

elcreative by selling you transfer possession and ownership of the item. you get money buyer gets item. end of the story. if you don't like the idea someone may buy a book in order to spinecut and ocr it or use it as a bunch of shit-begone leafs instead of reading don't sell since it's YOU who cheats by "selling" if you actually are not willing to transfer all the rights connected to such an action.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

elcreative by selling you transfer possession and ownership of the item. you get money buyer gets item. end of the story. if you don't like the idea someone may buy a book in order to spinecut and ocr it or use it as a bunch of shit-begone leafs instead of reading don't sell since it's YOU who cheats by "selling" if you actually are not willing to transfer all the rights connected to such an action.

You are missing the point of the hypothetical case... I couldn't care less what someone does with the item after they've bought it but I don't see the point of the emphasis on OCR'ing something that is produced as an artistic object... I wasn't referring to a novel or anything similar... one such item (as I've already stated) might be an artistic work based around specific typographic expressions of individual letters of the alphabet on custom paper which also incorporates designs into it - each letter being a different typeface and related to the actual paper it is printed on... now any idiot who wants to OCR "A, B, C etc" is welcome to do it but might find it quicker to type "A, B, C etc" in directly but it still wouldn't be the original, carefully crafted and designed concept piece...

And it is perfectly possible to buy an artistic work and have no other rights than to look at it, burn it, use as toilet paper but the artist still retains ALL reproduction rights... they are separate to the actual art unless contractually included in the sale...