Could the Kindle spark book piracy?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

It would appear to me that lending libraries are doing far more damage to publishersw. So why does almost everyone respect public libraries? Aren't they evil, don't they cause publishers to lose money every time a book is lent? So why have publishers been able to remain going concerns over the years with this great library evil blocking their ability to earn profit? I mean, to be fair, shouldn't we close libraries? Shouldn't we force all of those evil citizens who are currently reading for free to fork over the full price for each book they read? This would be fair, wouldn't it? It would stop the libraries from inflicting needlesss agony and unethical loss on those poor publishers......

Libraries are actually one of the major buyers of books. If 1000 libraries each have a copy of a book, that's 1000 sales for the author. Moreover, they often pay MORE for their books than the ordinary buyer.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Moreover, they often pay MORE for their books than the ordinary buyer.

Anyone have any idea if that translate to more money to the author? It'd be nice if it did, but my cynical mind is suspicious that it doesn't

If someone knows the answer I'd really like to hear it.

[eppythacher]

The morality in sharing is a moot point. The genie is out of the bottle, DRM will only hurt and alienate legitimate customers, you can't stop sharing so you will need to switch your business model. Alcohol in 2004 caused many deaths but no
one (other than MADD) is advocating that we go back to prohibition. If selling alcohol is legal why not make copyright infringement legal? Oh right, because in
America it's better to lose life than money. I mean really, I can sell alcohol that
causes all these problems but if some "steals" my process for distilling etc and shares it on the internet that's illegal? Really?

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm

Mortality

Number of alcohol-induced deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 21,081

Number of alcoholic liver disease deaths: 12,548

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Libraries are actually one of the major buyers of books. If 1000 libraries each have a copy of a book, that's 1000 sales for the author. Moreover, they often pay MORE for their books than the ordinary buyer.

Oh, I don't dispute that. BUT- if each lending costs the publishers a sale, well, they are also one of the biggest causes of profit loss for publishers. If 1000 libraries each have a copy of the book, and each copy means 50 lost sales for the publisher, that means 1000 sales instead of the 50,000 possible sales. Doesn't look like great economics.....

Looks like, if each lending here means a lost sale, that those libraries are causing the publisher to LOSE 49,000 sales!!!!!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I think this thread needs a new poll, to determine:

• How many people who take e-books for free, actually work for a living?
• How many people who work for a living believe they deserve every penny of what they get (and then some)?
• How many people would still be doing their jobs if told they would no longer be paid? and
• How many people believe that total strangers, not connected with their work, should dictate how much they deserve to get paid?

What I'd be interested to see is how many people answer "Yes" to every question.

For the old poll, maybe we should add the category:
"You can't cause a spark when the area's already ablaze."

I've created this new poll over at https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17189

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

(Your MP3 example does not fit this situation: Ripping it yourself from the CD you own is not the same as getting it from someone else. If you want to argue that point, scan and OCR the book yourself. And don't send a copy of the e-book to anybody.)

If I have a CD and I want to rip it to put the music on my DAP, I can do that. Nobody is saying I cannot. Now, lets say my DVD drive is broken so that I cannot rip this CD, would it be an issue if I asked someone who also owns this same CD to rip it and send it to me via the net? IMHO, I think it would not be a problem. It would still come under fair use. I own the CD. I have the software to rip the CD. I just don't have the drive till my new one is here and installed.

Let's take an ebook that someone scanned and is not available for sale. I know legally it is wrong to download it should I get the chance to. But if I download it and then buy it once it became available in an ebook format I can use, would that be morally wrong?

Another issue that is a problem that needs to be sort is the tower of ebable. Let's say I find a legal ebook in PDF but not a format I can use. If I then find a copy on the net in a format I can either convert or use as is, is it OK for me to download this copy and use it as long as I also purchase the PDF copy even though I cannot use the PDF copy? Morally, I'd say it's ok. Legally, it's not. But in this case, the author has been compensated even though an illegal download was performed.

The laws need to be looked at in regards to digital content and changes makde to compensate for digital content. There are a lot of things with digital content that the laws do not take into account. like the situation above. We can make life so much easier if we fix the broken laws such that the user is happy and the content provider(s) get compensated.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

Oh, I don't dispute that. BUT- if each lending costs the publishers a sale, well, they are also one of the biggest causes of profit loss for publishers. If 1000 libraries each have a copy of the book, and each copy means 50 lost sales for the publisher, that means 1000 sales instead of the 50,000 possible sales. Doesn't look like great economics.....

Looks like, if each lending here means a lost sale, that those libraries are causing the publisher to LOSE 49,000 sales!!!!!

And do you believe this to be the case? I don't, any more than I believe that anyone who downloads an illegal eBook would have bought it. My objection to the latter is not primarily lost sales, but the principle of committing a crime.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

And do you believe this to be the case? I don't, any more than I believe that anyone who downloads an illegal eBook would have bought it. My objection to the latter is not primarily lost sales, but the principle of committing a crime.

Here is a situation I'd like your take on it.

You purchase a legal ebook. You load it on your reader but find that either due to too many errors or poor formatting or both, you just cannot enjoy reading that book. So you stop reading it. You go back to the shop you got it from and ask for a refund and you are told no. Sometime in future you happen to find an ebook copy of this same book that someone scanned. You download this copy and convert it and format it how you like. You still have the legal copy and now the illegal copy. You paid for the legal copy, but have been unable to read it. Do you see there to be a moral issue here? I kow technically legally the law was broken.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Here is a situation I'd like your take on it.

You purchase a legal ebook. You load it on your reader but find that either due to too many errors or poor formatting or both, you just cannot enjoy reading that book. So you stop reading it. You go back to the shop you got it from and ask for a refund and you are told no. Sometime in future you happen to find an ebook copy of this same book that someone scanned. You download this copy and convert it and format it how you like. You still have the legal copy and now the illegal copy. You paid for the legal copy, but have been unable to read it. Do you see there to be a moral issue here? I kow technically legally the law was broken.

No Jon, I have no "moral" problem with that from YOUR point of view. What I have the problem with is the fact that the illegal book is "out there in the wild" in the first place. You have paid for it, but there will be thousands of other downloaders who have not.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You purchase a legal ebook. You load it on your reader but find that either due to too many errors or poor formatting or both, you just cannot enjoy reading that book. So you stop reading it. You go back to the shop you got it from and ask for a refund and you are told no. Sometime in future you happen to find an ebook copy of this same book that someone scanned. You download this copy and convert it and format it how you like. You still have the legal copy and now the illegal copy. You paid for the legal copy, but have been unable to read it. Do you see there to be a moral issue here? I kow technically legally the law was broken.

The moral issue here is that the store who sold you the badly-formatted copy should have given you your money back. Now you know what kind of store that is, hopefully you won't shop there anymore, you'll warn others, and eventually, they'll have to clean up their act and sell good stuff.

The legal issue here is... you still took an illegal copy of the book. That doesn't change, no matter what-all you bought before.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No Jon, I have no "moral" problem with that from YOUR point of view. What I have the problem with is the fact that the illegal book is "out there in the wild" in the first place. You have paid for it, but there will be thousands of other downloaders who have not.

Any most of them probably think you were stupid to have paid for it.

Dale

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Another issue that is a problem that needs to be sort is the tower of ebable.

I think most would agree that the many disparate formats of e-books has been a major contributor to the issues of theft and piracy... primarily by adding confusion and frustration to the overall picture, elements that tend to "loosen" people's morals in direct proportion to the amount of confusion and frustration they encounter.

As the music industry is currently demonstrating, settling on a single format (or two, considering iTunes) would be key to reigning in much of the confusion and frustration, standardizing systems, and making it easier to create a fair and understandable system that benefits both the consumer and the creator.

E-book readers that can handle all of the standardized formats would help, too.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Let's take an ebook that someone scanned and is not available for sale. I know legally it is wrong to download it should I get the chance to. But if I download it and then buy it once it became available in an ebook format I can use, would that be morally wrong?

I asked this same question yesterday and told that of course it was immoral and that I was a liar for saying that I would actually buy the legal book when available.

Edit to add: Also in my scenario I actually would own the paper copy, too.

[Sparrow]

My hypothetical scenario involves a visually impaired person who can't read any commercially available printed versions.
They buy an eVersion, and use it to print off an illegal copy in a huge font that they can read.

The problem is, I can't decide if they should get five years or ten.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Anyone have any idea if that translate to more money to the author? It'd be nice if it did, but my cynical mind is suspicious that it doesn't

If someone knows the answer I'd really like to hear it.

In some countries you use tax money to pay money to translators and authors. The amount depend on how many times the book was borrowed.
So in that case the publisher is bypassed.