Piracy vs Bookstores

[tompe]

Originally Posted by moz

I
Between Tompe who's convinced that anyone using google is a thief

Yes, not me. I think google is a good thing, if it does not become too powerful, according to the for the greater good principle.

[spooky69]

Everybody should read all my posts in this thread only because I am the realistic pirate and I said all the best things. In providing my brilliant commentary, I delicately balanced issues of race, gender, and social inequality and spanned them into a bridge that shows everybody that we are all basically the same (humans) and I also didn't use any examples that included 1984.
Seriously, though, folks, I did actually say all the best stuff for the pirates and it ticks me off when people want to classify all pirates as excuse-makers as I have been, as stated, extremely realistic about the merits (or lack thereof) and consequences of my actions. I am basically the best and I want more attention than I am getting. I'm really smart and I can write with the best of 'em and also I use most punctuation correctly and I'm the best.
Why don't people pay more attention to me?
Fin

[Halk]

Twenty one pages....

I started this thread in order to have a discussion. It'd have been pointless unless I was prepared to listen, and I think I have learned from it.

I've already said I'm going to change my behaviour - I'll now browse through what I can pay for legally, rather than browse through all books and then have to choose between not getting the book, or pirating it.

I've also decided not to use DRM removal tools. Not because it's illegal, but because it's not justifiable for me to tell myself it's ok for me to use them, but not ok for other people to use them because other people might spread the books around.

I've decided I have no issue with DRM'ed books. However if I'm given a choice between a DRM free book and one with DRM then I'll value the DRM free one higher.

I've also decided to do all I can to make sure I buy from an online bookstore that meets, as closely as possible, what I consider to be a good model. By that I mean the site is not just a "Here's the books, here's the badly formatted blurb off the back of the book, buy it if you want" site. I'll be looking for sites which actually add some value to the shopping experience. Things like making sample chapters available. Allowing customer comments, things like that.

I won't share my books with other people, unless the purchase I make is intended to allow me to do that. For example if it's DRM'ed then I will assume it's intended for me and me only. If it's not DRM'ed and the author says it's ok for me to give it to someone if I delete my copy then I might do that. Unless something specific is said then I will assume I am paying for a different license than I would with a paper book, and that I am not buying a single product which can only be used by one person at a time, that I am instead buying the rights to read this product as and when I want, but it's only me that can do so.

[sealbeater]

I've been following this thread with some interest, fighting not to post. In regards to Halk's comment about

I've also decided not to use DRM removal tools. Not because it's illegal, but because it's not justifiable for me to tell myself it's ok for me to use them, but not ok for other people to use them because other people might spread the books around.
and
I won't share my books with other people, unless the purchase I make is intended to allow me to do that. For example if it's DRM'ed then I will assume it's intended for me and me only. If it's not DRM'ed and the author says it's ok for me to give it to someone if I delete my copy then I might do that. Unless something specific is said then I will assume I am paying for a different license than I would with a paper book, and that I am not buying a single product which can only be used by one person at a time, that I am instead buying the rights to read this product as and when I want, but it's only me that can do so.

I highly recommend that you read Richard Stallman's The Right to Read. This mentality of allowing others to restrict your reading material and being rather complacent in it's regard is very disturbing to me. I'm however, greatly relieved to think that sometime in the future, when ebooks are the main course for readers, there will always be means for people to get their hands on books without any restrictions. That's what's important in the end.

[Taylor514ce]

I think we'll end up with a type of patronage system, in the future, with authors supported by a group of core fans. I think we'll have fewer full-time authors, however.

[slayda]

There is no such thing as a "lost sell". To lose something you must have it. If you have a sell, then it is not lost. The idea of a "lost sell" is a fiction made up by some sells person's imagination to describe a "non-concept" aimed toward coercing people into feeling sorry for them and buying their product.

[Taylor514ce]

I disagree. A lost sale is a sale you would have had if another factor didn't enter the equation. Amazon "lost" the sell of a Kindle to me because I purchased a Sony. I purchased a Sony because one was available, and the Kindle was not. Out of stock = lost sales.

What's debatable is if a pirated download translates into a lost sale. Would the downloader have actually bought a real copy, ever?

[slayda]

Originally Posted by Taylor514ce

I disagree. A lost sale is a sale you would have had if another factor didn't enter the equation. Amazon "lost" the sell of a Kindle to me because I purchased a Sony. I purchased a Sony because one was available, and the Kindle was not. Out of stock = lost sales.

What's debatable is if a pirated download translates into a lost sale. Would the downloader have actually bought a real copy, ever?

So by that logic, someone has my lost $1,000,000 since that is an amount I might have had if some other factor hadn't entered the equation. Where is that dirty thief?

Amazon might have lost the "opportunity" of a sell, but didn't didn't lose the sell since they never had it. They just didn't "make" a sell.

[Taylor514ce]

Originally Posted by slayda

So by that logic, someone has my lost $1,000,000 since that is an amount I might have had if some other factor hadn't entered the equation. Where is that dirty thief?

I don't understand the point. Sorry.

We were talking about the concept of a "lost sale". A sale that was made, but that went to a competitor. Lost sales happen all the time. The question is whether a pirated book is a lost sale. I think the answer is "it depends". If this is a person who would have bought the book if it had been available, but stole it because he could, then yes, that act represents a lost sale.

If on the other hand, this is person who simply steals because he can, regardless of the availability or non-availability of a particular title, then no, it's not a lost sale.

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by Taylor514ce

I disagree. A lost sale is a sale you would have had if another factor didn't enter the equation. Amazon "lost" the sell of a Kindle to me because I purchased a Sony. I purchased a Sony because one was available, and the Kindle was not. Out of stock = lost sales.

What's debatable is if a pirated download translates into a lost sale. Would the downloader have actually bought a real copy, ever?

I'll chime in on this one. I will say your argument is a bit flawed because Mercedes can count me not buying one of their cars as a lost sale, but I see where you're going with it. I would have to say that the downloader would probably never have bought an ebook, but may purchase a hardcopy. I wouldn't even expect that to happen often, but it's helpful to have sometimes.

I've got a Sony reader and I've never (no, maybe twice) accessed the Sony Connect page. Never intend on buying a book from Sony Connect. Do they count my books as a lost sale?

[Taylor514ce]

Were you in the market for a Mercedes? Did you test drive one? Engage in the sales process but ultimately decide to go with another vehicle because Mercedes failed one of your buying criteria? Then yes, Mercedes lost the sale to a competitor.

If you were never in the market, or just engaged in wishful daydreaming, there never was a sale to be made. Similarly, if a bored teenaged hacker wannabe is browsing torrents and opportunistically downloads some books in passing, there never was a sale to be made. This action doesn't constitute a lost sale. If I shop Sony Connect for a particular book, compare it's price on Amazon for the Kindle Edition, get irritated at the irrational price disparity, and so actively seek out a stolen copy on the internet, then that's a "lost sale" and I'm a thief. Similarly, if I choose not to buy it all, because the price is just too high, that's a lost sale.

I think it's a pretty basic concept, folks.

[slayda]

I say again, "The term 'lost sell' is an intentional illusion put forth by lazy sells people". A sell is a discrete event. Before it happens it doesn't exist. Once it happens it can't unhappen (i.e. can't be lost) therefore there is no such thing as a lost sell. You might lose an opportunity to make a sell. You might have to make a refund if the buyer is unsatisfied but even that is not a "lost sell". The sell was made & your merchandise policy required you to refund the money. You didn't lose the sell. That event occured already in the past & without a time machine you can not undo it. Maybe not even with a time machine.

You can not lose something that you do not have!!!

[Redcard]

Lost sale is an insidious term brought to bear by people who think the act of copying a file is theft by taking, and not piracy/copyright infringement. For their argument to hold, they must assign value to the object taken, and then claim that they are "out" that value by someone having the file copied.

It's happened with MP3s, and it's happened with movie files, and it's going to happen more and more with Ebooks as Ebooks become more popular.

The fact is , if we remove the illegal version from the mix, and just have a legitimate ebook, and the person decides not to buy it.. it's a decision. It's not a lost sale because I chose not to buy a book from Sony's store. Worse, if I go to amazon and buy a USED book for $.01, does that mean the bookstore lost a sale for the difference between the New book and the Used book? No.

You cannot have a "lost sale" at all, except in the fantasy realm of the RIAA where they use the numbers to concoct damages via creative manipulations of the law regarding theft by taking and damages in civil suits. It's just not possible.

Now, I agree wholeheartedly that piracy is wrong. I agree that not compensating an author for something they wish compensation for is wrong. But I won't go so far as to agree that the concept of the lost sale exists, especially in something as transient as a computer file. It's still wrong, mind you, but the concept of the "lost sale by piracy" is just an invention to allow unreasonable damage figures to come into play.

[Taylor514ce]

If two vendors are competing for your business, and you award the contract to Vendor A, Vendor B lost the sale. Boeing vs. Airbus... Boeing lost the tanker contract to Airbus. This isn't a nebulous concept invented by the RIAA.

[Halk]

Originally Posted by Taylor514ce

If two vendors are competing for your business, and you award the contract to Vendor A, Vendor B lost the sale. Boeing vs. Airbus... Boeing lost the tanker contract to Airbus. This isn't a nebulous concept invented by the RIAA.

That's exactly right.

"We lost the Johnson sale. They went to our competitors because Brian messed up the estimates"

What the RIAA is saying is that someone who has downloaded thousands of albums would simply have bought every single one in a shop if they couldn't pirate them for free. Which is laughable.