Book Author is "Pirate"

[jethro10]

http://torrentfreak.com/author-slams...pirate-101213/

Found it on Digg.com

Ironic
J

[HappyMartin]

Originally Posted by jethro10

http://torrentfreak.com/author-slams...pirate-101213/

Found it on Digg.com

Ironic
J

Ironic? More like a damn cheek and very funny!

[Format C:]

I think it's the normal human behaviour.
It's not only limited to piracy (violation of my DR is theft, when I violate others' it's just a little episode), but to every situation.
Think about when your car is in a no parking area: it's just for a few minutes, there's no place around here; and when you find another car in the same area: those criminals have to put their f*** cars where the sun doesn't shine....

And so on...

It's a matter of beams and straws.

[Dulin's Books]

she says she will go and delete the music on her ipod. but she has already had the benefit o fit. she should, as the one person points out, purchase all of those songs legitimately

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Format C:

I think it's the normal human behaviour.

Yes, it is. That's why security was invented... and why digital files need them as much as physical products.

[K-Thom]

Huah, that made my day!

[Penforhire]

Too funny. The hypocrisy is strong with that one.

[wvcherrybomb]

Originally Posted by Format C:

I think it's the normal human behaviour.

I completely disagree. This is the behavior of a woman who thinks she is "special" and that laws don't apply to her. Not only does she have a sick sense of entitlement, but she is also not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[FatDog]

Well - it kind of shows that authors are just like us.

With music - we hear music for free by turning on the radio so not paying for a few songs from a DL site does not feel like a crime (even if we are an artist).

With software - we get Browsers for free, lots of shareware for free and Billions of websites with information for free so we do not feel like its a crime if we have Microsoft Office suite on 2-3 computers.

With newspapers we get lots of information for almost free (including the output of talented writers and reporters) .

We get so much of this stuff (paid for by Advertisers) we dont feel the crime. In fact - we become indigent about having to see commercials on television or expect the government to rebate us for a digital conversion box so our previously free TV signals can still be free.

Let me make my point another way:

Someone once said:

"Prostitution wont ever become big business because there are so many talented amateurs out there."

The Advertising industry and the internet has flooded us with so much free music, bloggers, information, etc., we no longer feel we should pay for it. Even among people who make a living from music - I will bet they all have pirated songs on their ipod.

[Barcey]

It's not surprising that somebody that bought fake Gucci and downloaded a bunch of MP3's would be afraid of "piracy". She should understand though that she really didn't lose $72,500 from illegal downloads of her books. I'm sure that she wouldn't have bought a real Gucci bag and wouldn't have purchased all those MP3's.

[wvcherrybomb]

Originally Posted by FatDog

We get so much of this stuff (paid for by Advertisers) we dont feel the crime.

If something is paid for by advertisers and, as such, offered to the public free then there is no crime.

Free is free. Stealing is stealing. Let's not get the two confused.

I do not have stolen music on my iPod.

[John Carroll]

Egads. Basically, she said: "I hate piracy . . . when someone else does it".

[JeremyR]

The thing is, intellectual property laws are somewhat well, imaginary, and not that consistent.

The iPod is a great example. It wasn't the first mp3 player by any means. So how come it's okay for Apple to steal an idea from another company and use its marketing prowess to squash all competitors that had products out first?

Because the law says so. Just like the (current) law says that it's okay to re-sell physical books and loan them out to people for money (like libraries). Even though in both cases, the original author doesn't get squat from every additional person reading it.

So people have to make their own moral and ethical judgments, really. In this case, like a lot of people, it was "What's best for me?" which was to complain about lost sales of her book to piracy, while buying counterfeit handbags (looks some how have more protection than ideas, like mp3 players) and downloading music she didn't want to pay for.

Or here. People play the game of nodding and winking and nudging when it comes to DRM removal, which is illegal in a lot of places. But since it's almost entirely aimed at removing it from a product you have bought, it's hardly morally objectionable.

[FatDog]

On a side note:

Years ago when CD burners were just becoming available I worked for a company where we wanted to archive radio commercials on CD's. At that time - blank CD's were $13 each.

I called around trying to find a better price and asking sellers why they were so expensive. One guy told me that almost a whole dollar of the $13 was a special tax that was placed on blank CD's to help rebate the music industry in advance of piracy. They got a special tax placed on blank CD's, DVD's, cassette tapes and VHS and Beta tapes to offset their losses.

If you have ever bought blank media - you have already paid taxes for piracy.

At this point - I no longer cared if anyone pirates music. I've already paid the tax's in advance for you.

[elcreative]

In this country, there is something called the Public Lending Right which does provide authors with a payment for every time a book is lent by a library so they DO get a payment for every additional person reading a book... it's not a lot but it is a payment... and where did Apple steal mp3 players from? It's hardly their fault that people actually liked the iTunes store idea, they were supposed to and, again, it's hardly their fault that others didn't do it first/as successfully.

And as far as secondhand books are concerned, that argument means when I sell my old computer/TV/jacket/whatever then I should pay the original manufacturer again!!!!

Originally Posted by JeremyR

The thing is, intellectual property laws are somewhat well, imaginary, and not that consistent.

The iPod is a great example. It wasn't the first mp3 player by any means. So how come it's okay for Apple to steal an idea from another company and use its marketing prowess to squash all competitors that had products out first?

Because the law says so. Just like the (current) law says that it's okay to re-sell physical books and loan them out to people for money (like libraries). Even though in both cases, the original author doesn't get squat from every additional person reading it.