Brian Keene on piracy

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

I find this all amazing. The author puts stuff on the Internet for free and then is surprised and hurt when after removing it from his website it starts popping up all over. Has he been living in a cave I wonder.

It's very disappointing that an author cannot expect people to obey the law. I know that there are criminals out there, but have things really become so bad that we should be "surprised" by the fact that a person has an expectation that people will be honest? I find that disturbing.

[HappyMartin]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's very disappointing that an author cannot expect people to obey the law. I know that there are criminals out there, but have things really become so bad that we should be "surprised" by the fact that a person has an expectation that people will be honest? I find that disturbing.

I do think that things have come to that Harry. Disturbing or not it is what it is. There has already been one person on this thread saying that they believe they have a right to free everything. That is how it is and I am surprised when people are oblivious to that reality.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's very disappointing that an author cannot expect people to obey the law. I know that there are criminals out there, but have things really become so bad that we should be "surprised" by the fact that a person has an expectation that people will be honest? I find that disturbing.

The surprise was that he was actually surprised it happened. Online piracy has been a fact of life for at least 15 years now, but he still thought that when he removed it from the internet it would be gone forever. This is a writer who's been all over Twitter and Facebook for years, and his blog is always full of genre-related news that he's found online, so he's obviously not an internet noob.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I'm not questioning that there are unfair/unjust laws; but "civil disobedience" is something that is saved for serious offenses. We're talking about ebooks, and let's face it... there's nothing serious about them. You buy or you don't... end of issue. There is simply no call to apply "civil disobedience" to ebooks.

What we are talking about is the compendium of human knowledge, it is not right to restrict access to this compendium based on income.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Perhaps when you grow up and start having to work for a living, you'll start placing a value on the work that other people do, too.

Intellectual property laws are complete garbage.

[HappyMartin]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

What we are talking about is the compendium of human knowledge, it is not right to restrict access to this compendium based on income.



Intellectual property laws are complete garbage.

And part of that compendium says stealing stuff is counter productive to the smooth running of a densely populated planet. I think it also says somewhere in this mythical compendium that if the creators in society, and not everyone is a creator, are not rewarded for there creations then they will stop creating and society will suffer. It is why west Germany made a Porche and East Germany made bugger all.

[Ozric]

Originally Posted by enzo94

Culture is free.

Books are free.

Music is free.

Knowledge is free.

There owners are all the people living in this planet.
I will continue using all the methods I know to get informations, pleasure and entertainment for free. As it should always have been.

It is a way like any other to say that this system is bullshit, and should change for the greater good of all mankind. Not only on copyright purposes anyway.

Until housing is free,

until food is free,

until electricity is free,

until transportation is free,

people need to work, and they need to be paid for that work. Some people choose to put time and energy into creative efforts, either to supplement their incomes from other jobs, or to support themselves completely. This requires a lot of work even before the creator(s) get skilled enough to produce a song that is worth hearing, a movie that is worth watching, a painting that is worth looking at, or a book that is worth reading, not to mention the months or years of work required to create these products and bring them to market.

If a person believes that the pleasure and entertainment they get directly as a result of all that effort isn't worth paying a few bucks, that's just selfish and sad.

Very sad.

[jessicalynn]

I'm completely baffled by the people who think works of literature someone took the time to create should be free. This isn't some abstract "wellspring of human knowledge" we're talking about, but the direct fruits of someone else's labor.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by jessicalynn

I'm completely baffled by the people who think works of literature someone took the time to create should be free. This isn't some abstract "wellspring of human knowledge" we're talking about, but the direct fruits of someone else's labor.

The people who spout the "all knowledge should be free" hoo-ha don't truly believe their own clap-trap either. They just think it sounds more righteous than; "I'm stealing everything I can and I don't care... so there." I have a smidgin (just a smidgin mind you) more respect for the honest thief than I do for the thieves disguising themselves as hipster zeitgeist-ers.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's very disappointing that an author cannot expect people to obey the law. I know that there are criminals out there, but have things really become so bad that we should be "surprised" by the fact that a person has an expectation that people will be honest? I find that disturbing.

But there are a lot of examples were we do not expect people to be honest. For example nobody expect everybody to respect speed limits. And nobody expect everybody to not try to cheat a bot on taxes. And so on.

So I really do not see how you can have your opinion.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by jessicalynn

I'm completely baffled by the people who think works of literature someone took the time to create should be free. This isn't some abstract "wellspring of human knowledge" we're talking about, but the direct fruits of someone else's labor.

I am baffled that people consider producing culture and art to be just like a simple work were you get paid for the time spent.

[CommonReader]

Copyright infringements are about as old as the printing press. It is just much more convenient now. Why would anyone expect this not to happen? People used to swap music on cassettes some thirty years ago as well, after all.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tompe

I am baffled that people consider producing culture and art to be just like a simple work were you get paid for the time spent.

Jessica didn't say that she thought content creators should be paid for the time spent; she said that she didn't think people should expect the results of the work to be given away for free.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Jessica didn't say that she thought content creators should be paid for the time spent; she said that she didn't think people should expect the results of the work to be given away for free.

The argument was that ust because it was somebody's labor it should not be free. But that is not how culture have worked historically.

And you have also said things in other threads that seems to indicate that you see producing art like a good book just like effort and time spent.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

The surprise was that he was actually surprised it happened.

Here's what Mr. Keene says about that in the linked OP article:

I’m used to piracy. What hurt was the pirate’s identity. It’s someone who has been a long-time reader. Someone who was an active and valued member of the old Keenedom forum . . .

[jessicalynn]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Jessica didn't say that she thought content creators should be paid for the time spent; she said that she didn't think people should expect the results of the work to be given away for free.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by tompe

The argument was that ust because it was somebody's labor it should not be free. But that is not how culture have worked historically.

And you have also said things in other threads that seems to indicate that you see producing art like a good book just like effort and time spent.

Sorry, but this just isn't true.

I'm going to use art, another form of culture, as an example (that's what I studied in college.) Most of our most celebrated artists did not just paint and give their work away. Michelangelo was commissioned (PAID) to paint the Sistine Chapel. He didn't simply donate his time and starve because he was creating "culture."

And if I remember correctly, Charles Dickens published several of his novels as "serials" in newspapers, so he could get paid by the chapter.