E-reads and Curtis Agency Declare War on Piracy

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by molman

- Economic impact isn't truly known. It probably lies somewhere in the middle...

The centre point between nothing and something is still better than nothing.

The only certainty is that if they download someone else's book instead of yours, you won't get anything at all.

[molman]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

The centre point between nothing and something is still better than nothing.

The only certainty is that if they download someone else's book instead of yours, you won't get anything at all.

sorry?

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Most of the highly sought after ones go straight to the speculators on preorder, and they have them on sale more or less on publication day at twice the price. One I was interested in a few months ago was $75 for the hardback and $5 for the ebook, both straight from the publisher (in America, so the hardback would have cost at least $100 to have it posted over).

I decided to go for the ebook, but left it until I had a reading slot for it. But when I went to buy it, it wasn't there anymore. I emailed the writer and it turned out the ebook was "limited" too, and it was withdrawn from sale as soon as the hardback sold out. He said the only option now was to get the hardback on Ebay. So I bought something else instead.

This sort of thing makes no sense to me at all, unless the writers in question are the ones selling them on Ebay?

a limited ebook? *facepalm* maybe i'm just silly but why bother writing if you don't want anyone getting their hands on your stuff to read it?

i just got back from a horror convention with an armful of trade paperbacks at which i handed authors and small press pubs cash money directly for their books, including a book i had taken yet not read.

i LOVE books. i'm obsessed with books. not everyone who takes does it as a middle finger to authors and publishers. hell, i haven't read a major publishers novel in years thus i wouldnt even bother downloading their stuff. no interest in even pirating it. i do my best to support the "underground" at almost every turn.

i don't expect a pat on the back. but i do do the right thing 99% of the time. i just don't want people getting the impression that i'm sitting here with terabytes worth of pilfered ebooks because thats faaaaar from the case. for every one that i've taken i've easily bought 5-10 legitimate novels.

like i said earlier, a lot of my "takes" are books that either no legitimate ebook exists nor is the book currently in print or available from the publisher. technically that may be copyright infringement but if the publisher or author arent exercising the copyright then to me its a victimless "crime". the same argument exists when it comes to playing emulated versions of out of print video games.

in this era of ebooks there is simply no excuse for things like "out of print" to exist.

i'll drop it now because i don't want to contine to hijack the thread.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by starrigger

Do you say this because you've examined the studies and this is a design bias you can identify? Or because you just don't agree with the conclusions of the studies?

I actually imagine it would be fairly difficult to get an accurate and unbiased study completed. For one thing it would require people to be honest about their habits, among a group who acknowledge a willingness to ignore copyright law. Can you trust their answers?

I'm not saying yes or no, because I don't know.

It is something I've noticed in various studies I've seen, and also something that others have made comments on before. I remember a few years back, one thinktank got in trouble because they were skewing studies in favor to the study sponsors.

[afa]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

You might also be interested in this:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...-are-bogus.ars

Thanks for that. A very interesting article, that highlighted what we've all suspected for a long time.

Glad to see even the US Govt has officially cast doubt on the validity of such 'studies'.

[kartu]

Originally Posted by starrigger

These "evil corporate hotshots" happen to be a small publisher that's bringing out-of-print books back into print in DRM-free editions (where permitted), at moderate prices. They pay a royalty rate to the authors that's twice what many large publishers pay, and pay it twice as often.

They might not be as good a deal for the writer as indie publishing, but a lot of writers don't want to do indie publishing.

Oh, and they're paying the cost of the takedown service on behalf of their authors. Yeah, they're evil, all right.

Name a single "fighting pirates" success story please. Turning a "pirate" into a customer. Heck, even stopping pirate from "pirating".

What I recall is the second hand market being killed in the name of "fighting piracy" and that's it. Idiotic standards that eventually milk loyal customers.

[sourcejedi]

I commented (far too much) on the E-Reads blog, but in short I think the critics here are wrong to look at this as a black-and-white issue.

Scenario 1: "naive" user searches on the name of a book, notices "free download" in the first page of results.

Scenario 2: i) "naive" user starts searching on the name of a book; search engine suggests a popular pirate-related keyword. "torrent" is generally excluded - although that's less likely to be understood - I'm guessing "free download" is also excluded in most cases. But I've seen "pdf", and most people will understand what that means.

ii) Naive user deliberately checks out the suggestion. Or just goes with the suggestion, because clearly the computer is trying to be helpful - I've seen at least one person do that, even though the suggestion wasn't particularly what they were looking for.

I'm not saying that automatically turns you into a free-loader. But apart from anything else, (most) authors are going to feel unhappy about that. And that's bad for E-Reads' business (i.e., getting authors to sell ebook rights).

Unauthorized copies are always going to exist. What this sort of effort may be able to do is keep them on the darknet. So called because you have to put some effort into looking for it, rather than seeing it repeatedly advertised as an alternative on commercial websites like google.co.uk.


[Surface detail ebook]
...
5. Surface detail ebook - free download - (1 files)
...
7. Surface Detail Ebook Free Download (pdf,doc,xls,rtf,ppt,pps and etc.)
8. Surface Detail (Book) by Iain M. Banks (2011): Waterstones.com


- Waterstones being the first non-Amazon option that would work for a UK buyer.

(Disclosure: that's the second book I tried. It's a recent book by a popular SF author. I didn't bother trying to anonymise myself to Google either, so it may have "personalised" the rankings based on previous searches).

E-Reads announcements... tend not to include such nuance, as starrigger alluded to. But if I was trying to sell non-DRM ebooks, and I noticed search results like the above, then I'd be very interested in what Muso are doing.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by kartu

Name a single "fighting pirates" success story please.

I never said it would be successful. I said it would be interesting.

However, since you raised the subject of success--yes, there are thousands of success stories, small ones. Every time an individual wakes up to, or is educated to, the fact that supporting piracy is tantamount to stealing, that's a success story. Every time a search turns up legitimate sources first, and pirated sources farther enough down the list that an average reader won't see it or go for it, that's a success story. And small success stories are important, because they're stories about individuals making better choices.

Obviously the pirates aren't going away. And obviously someone who wants to find the pirate stashes will continue to be able to do so. But that's not the point. As sourcejedi said, the point is to move the temptation away from where most readers won't get sucked in (Pssst! Wanna buy a free ebook?) on their way to the store.

People who know me on this board know that I'm no stranger to free promotion. I gave away many tens of thousands of copies of some of my books before I put them up for sale at a low price. A couple of them are still available for free. But that's by my choice, as the copyright holder.

I don't get too riled up by the pirates. Hell, I used a pirated edition of my own first novel as a source file for my own legitimate ebook release (through E-reads, as it happens). I recognize that I've gotten free advertising through the presence of my books on the darknet. I also imagine I've lost some sales. (How can I know? Answer: I can't.)

As a practical matter, I choose not to play "Whack-a-mole," though I don't mind E-reads doing it on my behalf. But I do contest, as an ethical matter, the sense of entitlement I sometimes witness that says, "I have a right to any ebook I want, whether it's been authorized by the author or not." Because no, you don't.*

*By you, I don't mean anyone in particular. I mean all of us.

[molman]

@starrigger: Whilst your post is quite reasonable I do take issue with one point.

Originally Posted by starrigger

Every time an individual wakes up to, or is educated to, the fact that supporting piracy is tantamount to stealing, that's a success story.

The breach of copyright is not tantamount to stealing (as much as this has been promoted by certain parties*). I find the procreation of this statement unhelpful to the discussion, and just a sloppy use of terms. "Piracy" another unhelpful word as used in this discussion is about digital goods which are distinct and different from physical goods, and the laws that protect such things.

*Here’s a funny spoof of the FBI Warnings on DVD's by the IT Crowd that helps make light of this point in a humorous way;

[molman]

Originally Posted by sourcejedi

Unauthorized copies are always going to exist. What this sort of effort may be able to do is keep them on the darknet. So called because you have to put some effort into looking for it, rather than seeing it repeatedly advertised as an alternative on commercial websites like google.co.uk.

Darknet. You been reading Daniel Suarez's Daemon lately or something? .. I personally don't ever see filesharing moving to just private networks, I think it's too much of a cultural thing now (cat's out of the bag so to speak) such that people are aware that this stuff exists out there and normally will find a way if they really want something... but yes some of this action may help to reduce the low hanging fruit, though personally I believe good markets will tend to have a bigger impact on this, as will maybe an acknowledgement that the value of things changes and that your good just might not be worth as much in the digital world.

[ebusinesstutor]

I like the approach of software to find illegal copies and takedown of the sites better than restrictive DRM that keeps me from enjoying the ebook I bought on as many devices I want (smart phone, tablet, computer, etc). At least it is targeting the problem people, not the innocent readers you want to buy more of your ebooks.

Piracy is definitely a problem. I purchased a print book, "Canon T1i/500D from Snapshots to Great Shots" to help me learn how to take better pictures. Love the book, but usually don't haul it with me when I am out taking pictures. So I wanted an ebook version to put on my iPhone which I always have with me.

Searched the title and #1 and #3 results were pirate sites. Someone less knowledgeable or less honest would have just downloaded it and paid nothing.

As it turned out, I felt the ebook was too high, so I purchased a similar topic ebook from O'Reilly thinking that a second perspective would be useful.

No, I don't believe EVERY pirated ebook is a lost sale, but a good chunk are. When the pirated versions show up higher in the search results than the real book, we have a problem.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by molman

@starrigger:
The breach of copyright is not tantamount to stealing

I find it disingenuous to pretend that it is anything but stealing. It is the misappropriation of something that doesn't belong to you. Makes no difference whether it's digital or physical. "Stealing credit" would be another example of a nonphysical meaning.

I'm not talking about legal definitions, which may differ; I'm talking about ethics and morality. You take something that isn't yours. That's stealing.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by starrigger

I find it disingenuous to pretend that it is anything but stealing.

That's why the law calls it unauthorized copying, copyright violation and similar terms.

Makes no difference whether it's digital or physical.

Actually, there is one very important key difference. See if you can figure it out.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

That's why the law calls it unauthorized copying, copyright violation and similar terms.

Didn't I just say I was speaking of an ethical and moral meaning, rather than legal terminology? Oh yeah. I did.

Actually, there is one very important key difference. See if you can figure it out.

I assume you're coyly referring to the fact that the original owner still has a copy. See if you can figure out why that's irrelevant.

[molman]

Originally Posted by starrigger

I find it disingenuous to pretend that it is anything but stealing. It is the misappropriation of something that doesn't belong to you. Makes no difference whether it's digital or physical. "Stealing credit" would be another example of a nonphysical meaning.

I'm not talking about legal definitions, which may differ; I'm talking about ethics and morality. You take something that isn't yours. That's stealing.

People say "stealing credit"? I honestly cannot say I've heard that phrase come up ("taking credit" perhaps). Anyway, yes language is a lovely thing and we can get all poetic and say that I stole my wife’s heart but in the context of a complex topic that this is, it is (in my opinion) unhelpful to not be clear, which I feel the loose application of the word stealing, or to steal as presented with relation to copyright infringement is.

Stealing has a strong relation to property, and the concept thereof, but to present the notion of physical property and intellectual property as the same is unconstructive to an honest discussion. These are not the same thing. The law recognises that they are not the same thing... and let’s be honest most people see a distinction between the two also. I think by presenting it as stealing you are in fact being dishonest (disingenuous) by being reductionist via the use of less than appropriate terminology.