How do you plan to wait out the coming ebook shakedown?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by foghat

Didn't say what either?

If you didn't mean to imply, 'don't buy their books' what were you trying to say pertaining to the text you quoted me on?

I said what I said clearly and concisely I didn't imply anything. You are trying to spin my works to mean something else. I disagree with what you said about it being misguided. If we support the status quo it continues. It is really quite simple.

[thrawn_aj]

Originally Posted by NVash

I would think theres only one real benefit to either.

DRM - You bought a book and you dont want to use it for just, say, the Kindle. So you rip the DRM off and put it on other things such as your Nook, iPhone or whichever other device.

SCAN - The book is on pback or hardcover but not yet an ebook. The person scanning has gotten tired of waiting and wants to read it on an ereader of their choice so they rip it apart and scan it.

Now I could be wrong but thats the only reason I can think of for either.

I agree. That makes sense.

[foghat]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I said what I said clearly and concisely I didn't imply anything. You are trying to spin my works to mean something else. I disagree with what you said about it being misguided. If we support the status quo it continues. It is really quite simple.

<sigh> The implication is clearly there.

My point about being misguided was specifically around not buying a book because one thinks the publisher is ripping off the author in terms of remuneration.

You state above you disagree with my saying it is a misguided reason for not buying an ebook (as I implied from your initial post...). In quoting my point in your reply and by not providing additional context in how authors should change this archaic system, the implication is clearly you feel not buying the book is a least one way to encourage them to change the system.

I suspect we will agree to disagree on each others interpretation of what has been written regarding this point.

[foghat]

Originally Posted by Musette

Also keep in mind that this is only one reason I wouldn't purchase from the Big Pubs even after they remove DRM - if they remove it. I probably wasn't clear on that point. One could say I can just remove it myself, and I have done that a couple of times but it's not something I'll make a habit out of.

Fair enough. Though I still think it a wrong reason, even if it is only one of the reasons. Would be no fun if we all agreed on everything.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by scveteran

If it takes more than 10 minutes, your time is not very valuable to you.

What makes you think that?

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by thrawn_aj

Forgive me but I'm just not seeing the advantage to scanning a pbook over DRM removal of a purchased ebook either for the purpose of (1) making a statement about DRM or for (2) staying perfectly legal. They both seem equally weighted in either aspect (unless I'm missing something?) Or maybe you're only talking about pbooks that don't exist as ebooks at all - in which case this question is entirely moot .

The publishers are still getting paid for one copy of the book - why would they care which one you bought - in that case, are you really hurting their system money-wise? Also, scanning entire books goes against the copyright notice printed on it (and copyright law) about as much as removing DRM does (though both are equally moral in my view as far as fair use is concerned as long as the resultant file is not distributed to anyone else).

Please don't construe this as an attempt to start anything . I'm just interesting in seeing if I've missed some (objective) reason to favor one over the other. If it's just personal choice, I'll be glad to respect that and move along .

Actually, in the USA, copyright law permits one copy for archival under fair use. If the original copy of the book is destroyed, then it becomes a medium shift and is also legal.

For me, the advantage of scanning a book is I already have over a thousand books and will soon have no room to store them. Scanning them changes them to a medium I will have room for. I do not have to buy e-books for replacements of the paperbooks I have (many I wouldn't be able to find replacements for anyway).

I buy paperbooks and scan them instead of buying the e-book when the e-book has DRM on it. I will not buy books with DRM; I resent being forced to break the law to be able to use a book the way I want (so far, stripping DRM is still illegal even though it blocks legal fair use; that may have to be sorted out in the courts but I neither the money or stamina to do so myself). Whenever possible, I will buy the book used.

[NVash]

Kind of off topic but how long does it take to scan a book? Im sure its at least a day long project right? Or itll only take a few hours if you skip OCRing and editing?

And on topic, Im surprised its legal to scan a book for your own usage. This is what was just said right? Its okay to scan one copy for your own use? That surprises me. But wait, thats legal right? Shocking parallel here but let me ask this. What makes you any different from a pirate? They just download said scan. Some may have bought it already, some maybe not. Some may be more than willing to purchase once a price drops or once the format is available but wont at this moment. I would assume the ones who havent purchased the book for whatever reason dont count but what about those who have? Are they still in the wrong if they download a scan of a book they already bought? What if they intend to buy it but want to check it out first? What if theyre just waiting for a version for their Kindle? Are these people just as wrong?

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by NVash

I would think theres only one real benefit to either.

For you. You can't speak for anyone else.

DRM - You bought a book and you dont want to use it for just, say, the Kindle. So you rip the DRM off and put it on other things such as your Nook, iPhone or whichever other device.

You want to keep a copy of the ebook in case the seller (or its authentication server) goes belly-up.

The ebook isn't available for the device you have, so you get what you can.

For instance, there's a guy over in the promote-your-book section selling some books I'd love to read. He doesn't sell them in any format which will go on my ebook reader. Nor in paper, for that matter. He lost up to $20.93 tonight -- that's what I spent at Smashwords acquiring books that weren't his. If I'd been willing to strip DRM (note: I won't buy DRM-locked ebooks) and convert the format, I could have bought and read his books instead of Tim Myers's. He lost a sale, I maybe didn't find a new author to buy from in the future, and Tim made twenty bucks off me. As if he doesn't have enough of my money already. :-/

SCAN - The book is on pback or hardcover but not yet an ebook. The person scanning has gotten tired of waiting and wants to read it on an ereader of their choice so they rip it apart and scan it.

See above.

Now I could be wrong but thats the only reason I can think of for either.

The only reason that you can think of. That doesn't mean it's the only reason anybody else can think of.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by NVash

Shocking parallel here but let me ask this. What makes you any different from a pirate?

The law.

(your jurisdiction may vary)

Personally, I don't have a problem with someone downloading an electronic version of any book they own, either. The publishers keep harping on how we haven't bought the content, just the right to read it. So we should have the right to read it however we want. If we want to read it as is, fine. If we want to slice it apart and stash it inside textbooks (I used to know someone who did) that's our right too. If we want to laminate it and read it underwater, anyone who's that crazy is welcome to do it. And yes, if we want to scan it for our own use -- or use someone else's scan (which is where most laws differ with me) that should, IMO, be just fine, because we've paid to read that content ... same person reading, same content being read.

I'm old enough to have grown up with books as books, something you buy, instead of having the publishers "pay and pay and pay again" mantras drummed into me from the cradle. It's weird, I know. But they used to be in the business of selling books, and once you bought that book, they didn't care if you read it, or propped up the couch with it, or loaned it to half the town. They sold a book, and so long as you didn't start replicating that book yourself, you could do anything you wanted with that one book. Now I hear the Boy Scouts have an award for turning in "copyright thieves". I'm sure it won't be all that long before we raise a generation that looks with horror on the fact that I read books multiple times and only pay their authors once. Seriously, how could that be fair, right? I've read, say, The Hobbit probably a dozen times, and I've only paid once. How dare I get 12 uses out of a book and pay only 1 time? And if I lend it to my mother ... how could that be legal?

P.S. Don't try to square right with legal or wrong with illegal. All too often they don't match up, and trying to make them correspond will just give you a headache.

[GreenMonkey]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

The law.

(your jurisdiction may vary)

Personally, I don't have a problem with someone downloading an electronic version of any book they own, either. The publishers keep harping on how we haven't bought the content, just the right to read it. So we should have the right to read it however we want. If we want to read it as is, fine. If we want to slice it apart and stash it inside textbooks (I used to know someone who did) that's our right too. If we want to laminate it and read it underwater, anyone who's that crazy is welcome to do it. And yes, if we want to scan it for our own use -- or use someone else's scan (which is where most laws differ with me) that should, IMO, be just fine, because we've paid to read that content ... same person reading, same content being read.

I'm old enough to have grown up with books as books, something you buy, instead of having the publishers "pay and pay and pay again" mantras drummed into me from the cradle. It's weird, I know. But they used to be in the business of selling books, and once you bought that book, they didn't care if you read it, or propped up the couch with it, or loaned it to half the town. They sold a book, and so long as you didn't start replicating that book yourself, you could do anything you wanted with that one book. Now I hear the Boy Scouts have an award for turning in "copyright thieves". I'm sure it won't be all that long before we raise a generation that looks with horror on the fact that I read books multiple times and only pay their authors once. Seriously, how could that be fair, right? I've read, say, The Hobbit probably a dozen times, and I've only paid once. How dare I get 12 uses out of a book and pay only 1 time? And if I lend it to my mother ... how could that be legal?

P.S. Don't try to square right with legal or wrong with illegal. All too often they don't match up, and trying to make them correspond will just give you a headache.

The kids, seriously, are starting to lose this concept. Between DRM'd downloads, digital copies and corporate campaigns to convince them (and governments backing the corps), they're beginning to think this way.

They really think, hey, you don't OWN this, you only own a limited license to use it in THESE ways that the corporation dictates. If you don't like it, tough, don't buy the product (license). What they don't get is that capitalism historically involves balancing the rights of the customer vs the rights of the seller. That balance has gone way out of whack in the recent decade or so, I think.

[thrawn_aj]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

Actually, in the USA, copyright law permits one copy for archival under fair use. If the original copy of the book is destroyed, then it becomes a medium shift and is also legal.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with scanning a book for a personal backup. I just thought the explicit admonition from the publisher on the pub-data page - usually along the lines of "No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher." - would make book-scanning a gross breach of contract. Seeing as I've been chastised endlessly in the past for "going against the seller's terms" by breaking DRM, this seems a trifle ... inconsistent.

As far as copyright law is concerned, I've perused it quite a bit recently, and I find no exemptions such as the one you noted (a citation of some kind would be nice - I'm deeply interested in this issue and the distinction between ebooks and pbooks in this regard fascinates me. Here's a link to the Title 17 laws for convenience).

To the best of my knowledge, the one archival copy rule was explicitly reserved for computer programs, not books. Ironically, ebooks might be considered to fall under this "backup" provision but not paper books (I know - it's stupid. I don't write the laws ).

There was some latitude granted, (but only to libraries and archival institutions, not individuals), for making one copy for archival purposes:

Except as otherwise provided in this title and notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for a library or archives, or any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment, to reproduce no more than one copy or phonorecord of a work, except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), or to distribute such copy or phonorecord, under the conditions specified by this section ...

In fact, in the fair use sections (#107 specifically), the last two factors of the "four-factor test for fair use" would seem to frown upon book-scans.

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

(#3 is obvious and #4 becomes relevant if ebook versions of the pbook already exist in the market).

Again, morally, I don't see any problem with scanning a book for personal use. Just saying that legally speaking (as evidenced by the intense litigation against Google - though I agree that's more contentious and somewhat different since distribution comes into play), book-scanning (even for personal use) appears to be one of those unenforceable, yet illegal activities (like breaking DRM); unless of course there is a personal archival copy exemption in the laws that I just couldn't find (I eagerly await your response - it's quite possible I missed it somewhere).

To summarize:
Breaking DRM: illegal under DMCA; goes against seller's terms (but only for Amazon - B&N doesn't have any such terms in the book or in any other place)

Scanning entire books: illegal under copyright act; definitely goes against seller's terms (included in nearly every book, even for books out of copyright - why buy the book if one doesn't agree with the terms?)

Both: morally fine, assuming no distribution. Is that an accurate summary?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by thrawn_aj

Personally, I see nothing wrong with scanning a book for a personal backup. I just thought the explicit admonition from the publisher on the pub-data page - usually along the lines of "No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher." - would make book-scanning a gross breach of contract.

Simple question: What contract?
I've signed no contract with anybody.
The only money that has changed hands is between me and the retailer.
People can claim whatever rights they want, it doesn't mean they have them.

[kennyc]

Contract law is interesting. The is no requirement for a paper or signature in many cases.

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by NVash

Kind of off topic but how long does it take to scan a book? Im sure its at least a day long project right? Or itll only take a few hours if you skip OCRing and editing?

And on topic, Im surprised its legal to scan a book for your own usage. This is what was just said right? Its okay to scan one copy for your own use? That surprises me. But wait, thats legal right? Shocking parallel here but let me ask this. What makes you any different from a pirate? They just download said scan. Some may have bought it already, some maybe not. Some may be more than willing to purchase once a price drops or once the format is available but wont at this moment. I would assume the ones who havent purchased the book for whatever reason dont count but what about those who have? Are they still in the wrong if they download a scan of a book they already bought? What if they intend to buy it but want to check it out first? What if theyre just waiting for a version for their Kindle? Are these people just as wrong?

Depends on the technology.

Doing it by hand will take a while if you have a slow machine and cheap scanner.

If you have a fancy one with a document feeder and you slice the book apart the scanning might only take a number of minutes. Or some frame and camera arrangement similarly.

If you have a book, you can format shift it - if someone else has done it for you already, then that would be your good luck.

[Blue Tyson]

[QUOTE=thrawn_aj;1208121]
Scanning entire books: illegal under copyright act; definitely goes against seller's terms (included in nearly every book, even for books out of copyright - why buy the book if one doesn't agree with the terms?)
[QUOTE]

Under your copyright act perhaps. It certainly isn't under mine.

They could also say the moon is green and you have to send them a case if scotch if you buy the book. Which is just as much crap as some of the things written at the start of books.