Access to Knowledge: YEA or NAY

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

But we do know he wouldn't back up his words with actions since he has already shown he doesn't. As has been mentioned elsewhere, there is more literature of all sorts available for free than Giggles could possibly read in his entire life yet he chooses not to read that. Furthermore he admits to having not paid for works that have been important to him or taught his something etc. Hence his continued spouting on about the important works and authors being supported by some group think via internet 2.0 is complete BS when it comes to his personal support.

I just don't see the point of having a public and a non public domain. Why limit ourselves? That whole, "But there won't be any incentive to write!" is just a straw man or something, for those who are into that sort of logical thing.

We could have a poll with two options, would you pay for content that is available for free, if all proceeds went to the creator. I feel that some of us would pay some of the time, and that should be more than enough.

Would it be ok for a computer to read every available work if the computer was capable of learning? Yes or No????

I recently downloaded a book but the format was not conducive to being scanned so I did not read it. Luckily I picked up a copy of the same book from my local library and have been reading the paper version. I already know that this book contains much useful information and is going to be extremely helpful for the future. Since I have already read the paper version would it be allright for me to reread the electronic version? Or is all this academic to simply sending some compensation towards the creators if you are capable of sending compensation? In other words, what need of copyright?

[PKFFW]

More waffle from you but I'm bored so I'll give it a go.........

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I just don't see the point of having a public and a non public domain. Why limit ourselves? That whole, "But there won't be any incentive to write!" is just a straw man or something, for those who are into that sort of logical thing.

The point is some people would like to attempt to make a living from their writing, just as you attempt to make a living from whatever you do. Without a "non public domain" that would be infinitely more difficult than it already is.

The moment you deny yourself the right to attempt to make a living doing whatever it is you choose to do then I might take your waffling a bit more seriously. And I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you actually do attempt to make a living from your own labour and efforts rather than living off the welfare of the state.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

We could have a poll with two options, would you pay for content that is available for free, if all proceeds went to the creator. I feel that some of us would pay some of the time, and that should be more than enough.

Assuming you have an employer should they only have to pay you some of the time for your efforts? Should all employers just pay some of the labour force some of the time and that should be enough?

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Would it be ok for a computer to read every available work if the computer was capable of learning? Yes or No????

Should that eventuality ever come up I will consider it then. Until that time it is just another piece of red herring sophistry from you.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I recently downloaded a book but the format was not conducive to being scanned so I did not read it.

I assume you mean scanned as in skimming through the text rather than reading it all? Rather than physically scanning a book?

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Luckily I picked up a copy of the same book from my local library and have been reading the paper version. I already know that this book contains much useful information and is going to be extremely helpful for the future. Since I have already read the paper version would it be allright for me to reread the electronic version?

It would be completely legal for you to read the electronic version if you borrowed that from the library or a friend etc. It would be an infringement of copyright if you downloaded and read the electronic copy without paying the required compensation for it. But you know that already.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Or is all this academic to simply sending some compensation towards the creators if you are capable of sending compensation?

But that's just it, you will not send some compensation to the creator will you? I'm hard pressed to believe you have ever done so, despite you claims to having occasionally sent a buck to an author.

And again, the moment you think it ok for any employer of yours to only pay you what they like, whenever they like, if they choose to pay you at all then I might take your waffle seriously.

And frankly, the fact you are using a computer to type this drivel day in day out means you must be a man of leisure and means and therefore have the ability to pay compensation. Either that or you live off the welfare of the state and simply just do not wish to.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

In other words, what need of copyright?

As a means of enabling authors to at least attempt to earn a living from their creative efforts.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I just don't see the point of having a public and a non public domain. Why limit ourselves? That whole, "But there won't be any incentive to write!" is just a straw man or something, for those who are into that sort of logical thing.

We could have a poll with two options, would you pay for content that is available for free, if all proceeds went to the creator. I feel that some of us would pay some of the time, and that should be more than enough.

Would it be ok for a computer to read every available work if the computer was capable of learning? Yes or No????

I recently downloaded a book but the format was not conducive to being scanned so I did not read it. Luckily I picked up a copy of the same book from my local library and have been reading the paper version. I already know that this book contains much useful information and is going to be extremely helpful for the future. Since I have already read the paper version would it be allright for me to reread the electronic version? Or is all this academic to simply sending some compensation towards the creators if you are capable of sending compensation? In other words, what need of copyright?

You sound like a broken record in the old days.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

The point is some people would like to attempt to make a living from their writing, just as you attempt to make a living from whatever you do. Without a "non public domain" that would be infinitely more difficult than it already is.

But what if it was easier? Copyright is a means of protecting authors against those who would steal their work and resell it for cheaper than what the author is selling it for. If everything was available for free nothing would be capable of being stolen, everything that was bought would be paid for. Perhaps it is too much of a shift in thinking so I will just continue to read whatever I wish to and compensate occasionally.

On a side note I do plan on extending this thinking to all areas of life...

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I just don't see the point of having a public and a non public domain. Why limit ourselves? That whole, "But there won't be any incentive to write!" is just a straw man or something, for those who are into that sort of logical thing.

That something you are looking for is called reality. Frederick Faust, better known by one of his pen names, Max Brand, wrote more than 500 novels and almost as many short stories during his life. He really felt his true calling was poetry, but he is remembered far better today for his westerns and for creating Dr. Kildare.

Now lets consider this for a moment; he wrote more novels than most people will read in a life time (and his life was cut short by WWII). How could he have done that without his writing being his main source of income?

Mind you, the western genre may not be as popular as it once was, but in his day, he was probably read by as many readers (if not more) as were reading Robert E. Howard or H.P. Lovecraft.

--
Bill

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

On a side note I do plan on extending this thinking to all areas of life...

When do you plan to give away your computer to me? I may or may not decide to pay you for it, depending on how much value I decide it added to my pool of knowledge.

I also call dibs on all your books.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

But what if it was easier? Copyright is a means of protecting authors against those who would steal their work and resell it for cheaper than what the author is selling it for. If everything was available for free nothing would be capable of being stolen, everything that was bought would be paid for. Perhaps it is too much of a shift in thinking so I will just continue to read whatever I wish to and compensate occasionally.

On a side note I do plan on extending this thinking to all areas of life...

If everything is available for free, then everything is stolen. We've been over this. Copyright came about because the printing press made copying easier. Computers making copying easier doesn't make copyright less important. Live your values and only read the books that the author offers for free.

I'm not trying to persuade you not to copy books, that is pointless, you're going to copy them anyway. I'm not even trying to persuade you that you have no justification for your position. It is, of course, quite easy to make mincemeat of your position. But I can't make you think.

However, you are quite effectively undermining your own position with each post you make. You couldn't be a better spokesman for the pro-copyright position if you tried.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

On a side note I do plan on extending this thinking to all areas of life...

Just let us know where to send the cake with the file in it

[ucfgrad93]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Just let us know where to send the cake with the file in it

I expect to see him on COPS in the near future.

[nogle]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Just let us know where to send the cake with the file in it

.epub or .mobi?

[mrscoach]

Copyright is a means of protecting authors against those who would steal their work. That sentence should have ended right there, it doesn't even matter about the 'selling for cheaper' schtick.

If everything was available for free nothing would be capable of being stolen, everything that was bought would be paid for.

If everything is free, how is anything bought? I truly want to know how you see this happening. You state that things should be free, and in the same sentence say they should be paid for. I truly cannot grasp this concept.

Now, I do advocate things being free. If it wants to roam on the open plain and eat grass and lay in the sun, let it. Or let it sleep with who/what it wants that is willing (No crosses of who's with what's or vice versa).

[QuantumIguana]

Actually, the purpose of copyright is to give people an incentive to create. Protecting the authors is a means to that end.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

Actually, the purpose of copyright is to give people an incentive to create. Protecting the authors is a means to that end.

Actually, I think it would be better to say that copyright is there to promote creation. It's protections provide not just an incentive, but also a means to an end.

Someone might want to write so badly that they will write regardless of any incentives; but by providing an income, it allows them to write more than they might have otherwise.

--
Bill

[AndrewH]

"Criminals often use basic rationalization skills to justify what they are doing."
- Brandon Sanderson, The Alloy of Law

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

"Criminals often use basic rationalization skills to justify what they are doing."
- Brandon Sanderson, The Alloy of Law

Now, that's unfair. He hasn't used any skills at all.