Piracy and Human Nature

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Certainly you can do the same with an eBook - by physically lending your eBook reader, with the book on it, to other people. That is the exact equivalent of lending someone your hardback book, and is absolutely fine. You break no laws if you do that.

To me, the exact equivalent would be giving up access to that ebook from your own reader(s) while your friend reads your copy (like what libraries do). What you propose is the same as handing over every paper book in your possession to someone that only wants to borrow one of them. So lending someone your ereader is in no way equivalent to lending them a paper book. I suppose you could buy a few extra ereaders just for lending to other people, but that's a considerable extra cost, and you will be limited by the maximum number of DRM activations whereas you have no such extra costs or limits with your paper copies. I think there is no exact equivalent as things stand.

[Anthem]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

And by now, we pretty much all know this is what we mean when we say "pirate." (And definitions change constantly; e.g. "nice" had a completely different meaning 200 or so years ago.) Quibbling over semantics doesn't really help.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Humans do not necessarily have an innate desire to "share cool stuff."

An interesting point (just remove the "cool stuff" bit and you know my thought). The motivations for secrecy are interesting as well. We could amend the statement to say that humans generally (but not always) share while also generally (but not always) desire secrecy and isolation. While possibly not innate (it very well may be learned behavior, mightn't it? Despite anecdotes) sharing does occur rampantly and sometimes recklessly.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

History is replete with secrets, exclusivity and restrictions on information, training and knowledge.

Agreed! It is also filled to bursting with the destruction of the barriers that previously veiled things.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

E.g. the Bible wasn't translated into vernacular languages until the 1500s, and even then over the objections of the RCC; and only the elite read Latin (if at all).

Yes, the history of the Bible and it's transmission is an interesting lesson.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I suggest you be extremely careful and circumspect when making blanket assertions about "human nature."

Noted. No one has a stranglehold on deciding just exactly what is and what is not part of "human nature". I'll admit, what you are viewing as a blanket assertion is mere laziness on my part as I just do not have the space or time to qualify it justly (consequently it may have been wise to leave it aside). And your continued assistance at tempering will be appreciated! (This is not sarcasm. I am thankful.)

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Yes, they don't want to lose control. Neither do you, yes?

I have control over almost nothing. Even my own life is barely my own. Though I wish I could say otherwise. Powerlessness is something I feel distinctly.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

But it's mostly economics, not power plays.

The history of copyright law is filled with what most people would think of as "power plays" (blurry economics!).

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

But yes, when a new technology is introduced, you're going to need to either make new laws or reshape old ones to keep up. "The laws don't keep up" is a common complaint.

Absolutely, and it is what so many people are pining for incessantly. Personally, I am mostly indifferent or uncaring, I just go along with whatever has been established (which may be sad, but I can't pretend to being an affected rebel, revolutionary, or reformer).

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by jerrywojo

I can count on 1 finger the amount of people I personally know who are capable of navigating the net in that certain way to partake in piracy. All have PC's or equivalents and most would have a hard time figuring out Farmville.

Now with that being said. I just wonder what the percentages are of "average people" having the technical know how to pirate books? I'm thinking the numbers are so low to actually be unmeasurable.

Jerry, I think that everyone who ever downloaded a pirated song when he was in high school or college is adept enough to download a pirated book. I think that music piracy started about fifteen years ago.

Perhaps you and I are showing our age when we say that we don't know people who can do it.

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

"Intellectual property" is a social construct. So is material property, marriage, currency, gender, law and political rights. None of these things have a "natural state."...

Humans do not necessarily have an innate desire to "share cool stuff." History is replete with secrets, exclusivity and restrictions on information, training and knowledge. E.g. the Bible wasn't translated into vernacular languages until the 1500s, and even then over the objections of the RCC; and only the elite read Latin (if at all).

1) Gender is a social construct? I was born with mine!

2) Let's not forget that St. Jerome translated the Scriptures into Latin when everyone spoke it (thus his translations were called the "vulgate") in the fifth century. The Church promptly adopted it because it was the vernacular of the day!

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

No one is entitled to any given book in any given format.

Christa, I have to disagree. The concept of copyright law is that when the term of copyright expires, the public is indeed entitled to the book's content! Thus it is called "public domain".

The revolutionary thing about digital files is that we can now divorce the content from the medium. Consider a book in the public domain like Huck Finn. You are entitled to publish that book, and to read it, without compensating its creator (the author).

In the past, you still had to buy the book because you were not entitled to the medium - the paperback book - without compensating its creator (the publisher).

But the price of the eBook file is born by you, and is so small it seems free.

I think that a great deal of the debate about piracy here at MR is based upon the common view that people should not enjoy something for nothing. But the digital revolution allows for just that.

I daresay that moral people believe that the author should be compensated. I believe that the current model of compensation doesn't work in the digital age. I believe that an alternative must be found. Artists did not always receive royalties. In the Middle Ages they were sponsored by princes, I think. Even today, painters are paid once for the work, and if the value goes up after that, they don't get any of the price appreciation.

[JeremyR]

As far as I am concerned, it really comes down to this:

Did someone do something for you that you enjoyed? If so, you should reward that person.

It's actually even selfish. If you buy someone's work, they are more likely to make more of it.

This is why if I like a book (or movie or whatnot), even if I could watch it/read it/whatever for free or cheap legally (like at a library, or renting it), I buy it. Even if I don't plan on watching it or reading it again.

Indeed, this is why I actually find libraries to be somewhat immoral. Basically they are depriving an author of potential sales. Sure they sold the library one book, but 100s, maybe 1000s read it.

Same with movies, videos, cds that libraries seem to favor over books, only they are now competing with retail businesses as well (well, I guess libraries also do that with book stores).

[Anke Wehner]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

1) Gender is a social construct? I was born with mine!

That's sex, not gender. Gender is all the baggage attached to it, like "Males must be strong and independent and good with tools and tech and maths, but may not show 'weak' emotions like sadness much, or wear skirts."

But this is going seriously off-topic.

[Anke Wehner]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

I daresay that moral people believe that the author should be compensated. I believe that the current model of compensation doesn't work in the digital age. I believe that an alternative must be found. Artists did not always receive royalties. In the Middle Ages they were sponsored by princes, I think.

Some self-published authors (and artists) use crowdfunding. M.C.A. Hogarth of http://stardancer.org/ has one serial running that is financed by donations - for a certain amount of donations/tips received in total, an installment will be posted publicly for anyone to read.

I know a webcomic artist had a somewhat related model for a while - they'd have their normal schedule, but also a tip jar, and when a certain threshold of tips was passed, the next update would have an additional page.

There's also the collaborative project http://www.tornworld.net/ - some content is available for free, some only for subscribers, and people can "sponsor" subscribers only content, meaning for a payment to the author the content will become available for non-subscribers, too.

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Even today, painters are paid once for the work, and if the value goes up after that, they don't get any of the price appreciation.

There are laws in some places (afaik for example France and California) that require artists get a cut of value appreciation. (Note, comparing the unique original work of art with mass produced books and arbitrarily often copyable digital files seems to me like it would require a bit more detail.)

Originally Posted by JeremyR

As far as I am concerned, it really comes down to this:

Did someone do something for you that you enjoyed? If so, you should reward that person.

That would work as an argument FOR being able to read for free, too. "I want to know what I'm buying FIRST, and only pay if I'm enjoying it, not pay for something I thought I'd like according to the blurb, but turned out to be not to my tastes at all."

What put a stop to me picking up books in shops spontaneously was one case where I did so, and found the book so disgusting and offensive that I would feel bad giving it away for free...

That would need work to get it really culturally ingrained to "pay what it's worth" after getting something for free.

[weatherwax]

Originally Posted by Anke Wehner

That would need work to get it really culturally ingrained to "pay what it's worth" after getting something for free.

That's tricky if people try to apply to to other areas like eating out in restaurants, getting a haircut or any other service we don't pay in advance. How many people actually judge what something is worth instead of what they would be willing to pay?

[weatherwax]

Quite a few of us are pirating if we take advantage of the Canadian copyright when downloading from MR or in some cases of the US copyright laws when downloading from Gutenberg. I don't feel bad about this because the authors or their family don't need the money any more.
It's different with current authors who are entitled to get paid, like anybody else working in publishing. Of course, if they are like the painter from an example stated above and got paid a certain amount to write a book, there is no need to worry about their roaylties. But afaik most authors and possibly also translators also participate in the sales.
And the publishing companies who would pay the author's salaries must add this cost and their other cost to the books they sell. And other than the painter, they cannot charge everything for the first book and then they are done.

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

A person who non-commercially distributes IP without permission is a "copyright infringer."

It depends on the jurisdiction. In some places it must be "commercially" to qualify as an infringement.

[jerrywojo]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Jerry, I think that everyone who ever downloaded a pirated song when he was in high school or college is adept enough to download a pirated book. I think that music piracy started about fifteen years ago.

Perhaps you and I are showing our age when we say that we don't know people who can do it.

Agree the computer/technology illiteracy among older adults is shocking.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by JeremyR

As far as I am concerned, it really comes down to this:

Did someone do something for you that you enjoyed? If so, you should reward that person.

Some writers have stated they have seen an increase in sales after their books have been pirated. That would suggest that what you say above is already happening. I certainly can't think of any other reason.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Christa, I have to disagree. The concept of copyright law is that when the term of copyright expires, the public is indeed entitled to the book's content! Thus it is called "public domain".

Two things. First, in the context of my statement, this does not apply. Penquin Classics have every right to charge money for and copyright their issue of any given PD book - that particular edition is not free. Once you buy it, you can extract the original (PD) content and use it to your heart's content as long as you don't copy Penquin's protected formatting, artwork or any additional content they add to it. Second, copyright laws do not state that it has to be made available on demand - if you want to utilize PD content, you're responsible for obtaining the content in a legal manner.

Thus, you are entitled to use the content, but you are not entitled to any and every copy that may exist. This is especially true with ebooks because NO issued ebook edition is inherently in PD - it's only in PD if the publisher (like Project Gutenberg) releases it such a manner. The wonderful people who lovingly format and upload files to MobileRead do so willingly - they are not obligated to do it this way simply because the source content is PD.

I daresay that moral people believe that the author should be compensated. I believe that the current model of compensation doesn't work in the digital age. I believe that an alternative must be found.

And I hope that moral people believe that everyone involved in bringing a quality book to fruition should be paid, and that is often more than just the author. Yes, we need a new model as we move away from the traditional publishing model. Self-publishers are taking on more of the expenses once taken on by the publishers, such as editing, artwork and marketing. Those things cost money, and when they aren't paid for, it is often painfully obvious. If they can't make enough money to cover those expenses, the quality of available writing will suffer.

Artists did not always receive royalties. In the Middle Ages they were sponsored by princes, I think.

Throughout time, the world of the arts shifted. In some places in the olden days, the arts were reserved for the elite - and the elite were the patrons of the arts. They bankrolled the creators. A wealthy person could make or break "their" composer or artist on a whim. Even today we have patrons that do the same, but usually it is the fans that provide the financial support because the arts are now available to we poor peasants. This can actually cause the patrons to spend more in some cases, but that's a whole 'nother phenomenon. I've seen it first hand in the local arts community, and it's kinda funny and kinda sad at the same time.

Even today, painters are paid once for the work, and if the value goes up after that, they don't get any of the price appreciation.

Painters can be paid more than once for a work - artwork such as paintings and photographs can be licensed as reproducible content just like text. That's how we get those calendars from the gas company every year. Depending on the terms of the sale, the painter may or may not hold right of reproduction after the original is sold.

I don't think we're actually in disagreement on much here, GA. But I do tend to be long-winded when I haven't had enough coffee.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Jerry, I think that everyone who ever downloaded a pirated song when he was in high school or college is adept enough to download a pirated book. I think that music piracy started about fifteen years ago..

Digital downloading of music certainly. But I do remember mates buying an LP and all of us getting cassette copies and that goes back 30 years.