Can I sell my K3 with my ill gotten books?

[ProfCrash]

Again, not quite. In your example you actually steal a tangible object (the owner no longer has it), in the first example you download a file (violating copyright, perhaps, but the owner still has it.)

Some how or another I think that a DA would disagree with you on this.

So if you steal the physical property, denying the store, publisher, and author proper payment for a physical good, it is theft. If you download something illegally over the internet, denying the store, publisher, and author proper payment for the data, it is not theft? The owner of the book (the author) still has a copy of his words written down when the book is shoplifted. You have not taken his only copy of the book.

The real difference is that you are more likely to be caught stealing from a store and punished (banned from the store potentially prosecuted) then you are when you steal over your computer.

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by LoveBunny

[B][COLOR="Magenta"]Hi everyone!

So I have till November 25th to send this one back and not get charged, or I can attempt to sell it for a small profit with books included.

You think that a used Kindle with illegal books that can be downloaded for free is going to fetch more than a new Kindle?

[karthwyne]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

Some how or another I think that a DA would disagree with you on this.

You would be wrong.

First, a DA wouldn't touch it since it is a civil matter, not a criminal one.

theft n. the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use (including potential sale). In many states, if the value of the property taken is low (for example, less than $500) the crime is "petty theft," but it is "grand theft" for larger amounts, designated misdemeanor, or felony, respectively. Theft is synonymous with "larceny." Although robbery (taking by force), burglary (taken by entering unlawfully), and embezzlement (stealing from an employer) are all commonly thought of as theft, they are distinguished by the means and methods used, and are separately designated as those types of crimes in criminal charges and statutory punishments. (See: larceny, robbery, burglary, embezzlement)
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/

Napster was sued under Intellectual property laws and found guilty of copyright infringement, not any form of theft.

[TheKindleWorm]

I think you would do better to send it back to Amazon.

But if you do sell the Kindle on I hope you will make it clear that it is in fact faulty as some of the keys are starting to fade.

[ProfCrash]

And Al Capone was tried for tax issues.

Just because a group was sued for thing does not mean that they are not guilty of the other. It means that the government felt like it could make a better case for one crime then another.

If you are taking something that belongs to someone else and not paying for it you are stealing. Downloading pirated works means that the Publisher and Author are not getting paid for the book. That is theft. You can call it something else if it makes you feel better about it but it is theft.

[Timmy_B]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

That's actually not as clear-cut as you make it out to be...

Again, not quite. In your example you actually steal a tangible object (the owner no longer has it), in the first example you download a file (violating copyright, perhaps, but the owner still has it.)

But the moral standard SHOULD be, "Did YOU pay for it". Forget about who has the physical object.

And BTW, the OP is a TROLL. S/he knows the answer, they just love throwing s*&% in the game.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by wayrad

You think that a used Kindle with illegal books that can be downloaded for free is going to fetch more than a new Kindle?

[karthwyne]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

And Al Capone was tried for tax issues.

Just because a group was sued for thing does not mean that they are not guilty of the other. It means that the government felt like it could make a better case for one crime then another.

Please show me where the government was involved ANY software/data/music/etc piracy case in the USA. Please cite any case where any entity was brought to trial regarding piracy where any version of theft was used as the law broken - regardless of the outcome of the case.

I'm not promoting piracy, I simply have a problem with someone pointing to the sky and claiming it is neon green. Sure, that is a color too, but it isn't blue. Call a spade a spade.

[Esquire1]

Everyone is a lawyer on this forum, it seems. Should we change the forum name to MobileREsq.com?

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by wayrad

You think that a used Kindle with illegal books that can be downloaded for free is going to fetch more than a new Kindle?

by the by... I wasn't attempting to promote piracy, just wondering why the OP would think that having books on the device would prompt enough interest to justify not sending it back.

I can kind of understand buying used electronic goods, I've purchased several TVs and stereos from pawn shops, but I don't get buying used Kindles. watching the people come in here that have been burned by buying a Kindle that "fell off of a truck" (how ARE those Chinese Kindles doing anyway!?) and be surprised by it never fail to amaze me. I also don't get why people think that Amazon is constantly over their shoulder reading along with them

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

[Bittybye]

Originally Posted by Esquire1

Everyone is a lawyer on this forum, it seems. Should we change the forum name to MobileREsq.com?

You mean the law digree I got here, isn't valid?

"Acquiring" is stealing, why would you do that? Do you want your favorite author to stop writing becasue he/she doesn't make enough money because people are stealing his/her work?

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

by the by... I wasn't attempting to promote piracy, just wondering why the OP would think that having books on the device would prompt enough interest to justify not sending it back.

In a way, it'd almost be worth seeing them try it and discover for themself that Crime Does Not Pay, even if you don't get caught.

[lebleaux]

A question, no agenda, just curious. If I own a book (as in I purchased it from a bookstore) and now I wish to have that book available to read on my Kindle what should I do. I could buy it again, I could probably download a torrent and get it that way or I could scan it, I guess. I would sooner buy than scan but am more likely to go the torrent route. Am I breaking any rules (legal or moral) in doing this. Similarly, once I have it in an electronic form, am I breaking any covenants if I give it to a friend to read - which I often do with a book. If I am not breaking any covenants then what is to stop me making electronic copies of all the books I own available to anyone via the internet.

[karthwyne]

The legal answer is that you would need to purchase the book again - and you should not loan it to a friend. Scanning your copy would also be permissible. EDIT: in the US

What you do is up to you. This is an area where I think laws need to be updated. In the end, what is the difference between scanning the copy yourself, or downloading a scan that someone else did?

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by lebleaux

A question, no agenda, just curious. If I own a book (as in I purchased it from a bookstore) and now I wish to have that book available to read on my Kindle what should I do. I could buy it again, I could probably download a torrent and get it that way or I could scan it, I guess. I would sooner buy than scan but am more likely to go the torrent route. Am I breaking any rules (legal or moral) in doing this. Similarly, once I have it in an electronic form, am I breaking any covenants if I give it to a friend to read - which I often do with a book. If I am not breaking any covenants then what is to stop me making electronic copies of all the books I own available to anyone via the internet.

I tend to think that the touchstone is whether more than one person simultaneously possess copies of a book that only one paid for. If you loan a p-book, that doesn't happen, so it's OK. If you lend your ereader and don't keep any backups, same thing. If you scan your own book, you have two copies, but nobody else has access to them and you can't read both at once, so no harm no foul (although laws on this vary - it's a gray area in the US and prohibited in the UK from what I've heard). Downloading a book you already own is a subject on which opinions differ, but according to my understanding, the nature of torrents means that you are also sharing what you download, so that would be active distribution of duplicate copies to people that haven't paid for them, a more serious offense. YMMV
(edited to add: the above assumes that the book is still in copyright - if not, of course it's fair game.)
(edited again: darn, I usually don't get into discussions of this - they tend to become acrimonious.)