Book Publishers Force Down Piracy Sites

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by sabredog

But YOU mentioned it...AND....in writing...on a public forum no less!!!!...

Yep, more data for the people to collect. "People who don't buy a movie because they aren't interested in it" go figure ;-)

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Are you talking about a hypothetical pirate that never buys content, one that all research shows doesn't exist?

I'm talking about a very real thing, which is people that consume content that's up for sale without paying. The point is simple and was stated simply.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by sbroome

I'm talking about a very real thing, which is people that consume content that's up for sale without paying. The point is simple and was stated simply.

And your point is also describing as always those that use the library.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

And your point is also describing as always those that use the library.

No it doesn't, libraries offer legal rentals. No relation.

I just realized I already covered this with you. No point rehashing the same thing when i can just link to it.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=128

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by sbroome

No it doesn't, libraries offer legal rentals. No relation.

I just realized I already covered this with you. No point rehashing the same thing when i can just link to it.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=128

I no that we went through this before. But you still don't want to acknowledge that "people that consume content that's up for sale without paying" describes library patrons perfectly.

[sbroome]

The word is "know" and you're still wrong.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by sbroome

The word is "know" and you're still wrong.

About what? You seem to say that losing the pirates as readers doesn't affect the bottom line of the authors because they aren't paying for what they consume. You are ignoring the fact that research shows that they are still buying content, so losing them as readers does actually affect the authors as well as the fact that library patrons are doing the same thing.

You can go to the point of view that even if they spend money on some content, the money won't necessarily be spent on the content from the same author that they pirated so that author still presents a loss. But you have the same effect with freebies and PD books.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by sbroome

No it doesn't, libraries offer legal rentals. No relation.

I just realized I already covered this with you. No point rehashing the same thing when i can just link to it.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=128

For a lot of people, the internet has directly replaced libraries for a lot of the things they used to go there to do. Research, fact checking, casual reading, all that can be done without leaving home, or even getting dressed if you don't want to.

It shouldn't really come as any surprise that people would turn to the internet for their disposable entertainment media in the same way, for the same reasons. If there was a legal alternative people would use that instead of turning to pirate sites. But the publishers seem to be doing everything they can to stop libraries from lending ebooks, and what there is available is a very limited selection.

Sort out the reasons (or excuses, if you prefer) for piracy and it will stop being a problem. Not that it's much of a problem now. Writers, and by extension publishers, are already losing more money through second hand book shops than they will ever lose through piracy. When print books are restricted to limited edition hardbacks for collectors, even if just 10% of the people currently buying second hand paperbacks switch to buying ebooks that will represent a massive increase in profits.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

For a lot of people, the internet has directly replaced libraries for a lot of the things they used to go there to do. Research, fact checking, casual reading, all that can be done without leaving home, or even getting dressed if you don't want to.

This explains quite a bit about the education level of many internet users. People actually pretend that wikipedia represents some sort of academic standard. I wouldn't consider this progress.

It shouldn't really come as any surprise that people would turn to the internet for their disposable entertainment media in the same way, for the same reasons. If there was a legal alternative people would use that instead of turning to pirate sites.

In another thread somewhere I posted the top pirated music from last year. It was all READILY available - legally - on multiple sites.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by sbroome

This explains quite a bit about the education level of many internet users. People actually pretend that wikipedia represents some sort of academic standard. I wouldn't consider this progress.

Possibly because they cite sources for the information that they provide. The academic system is based on peer-review and wikipedia is getting closer to that.

Originally Posted by sbroome

In another thread somewhere I posted the top pirated music from last year. It was all READILY available - legally - on multiple sites.

Did the top pirated list match the top sales list?

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by sbroome

This explains quite a bit about the education level of many internet users. People actually pretend that wikipedia represents some sort of academic standard. I wouldn't consider this progress.

Not all progress is positive. Digital audio and video, for example, are both of a lower quality than their analogue counterparts. But their convenience factor compensates for that.

Originally Posted by sbroome

In another thread somewhere I posted the top pirated music from last year. It was all READILY available - legally - on multiple sites.

But not anywhere near the price it would cost them to rent it from the library. I'm talking about disposable entertainment, things they pick up on a whim, either because they want to see what it is like, it is something they would only want to read/watch/listen to once, or they just don't value it enough to buy it. That is what they used libraries for.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I no that we went through this before. But you still don't want to acknowledge that "people that consume content that's up for sale without paying" describes library patrons perfectly.

No it doesn't. In most countries, libraries pay the author whenever a book is borrowed. Look up "Public Lending Right" (PLR).

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No it doesn't. In most countries, libraries pay the author whenever a book is borrowed. Look up "Public Lending Right" (PLR).

You have a funny definition for "most". I wouldn't say that 27 countries out of almost 200 can be considered most.

Not all of the 27 are paying all the authors because they don't want to give money to other countries (from wikipedia):

PLR programs vary from country to country. Some, like Germany and the Netherlands, have linked PLR to copyright legislation and have made libraries liable to pay authors for every book in their collection. Other countries do not connect PLR to copyright. For a nation like Canada or Australia the majority of funds would be going to authors outside the country, much of it to the United States, which is unpalatable to those nations.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No it doesn't. In most countries, libraries pay the author whenever a book is borrowed. Look up "Public Lending Right" (PLR).

Yes, but artist are payed from the extra tax on memory and disks also so it does not have to be a category difference here.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tompe

Yes, but artist are payed from the extra tax on memory and disks also so it does not have to be a category difference here.

How does that work? How is the amount of money that each author gets decided on, I mean? With library loans, you have a direct record of the number of times each book is borrowed. If you're saying that a tax on blank media could compensate authors for piracy, how would the number of times that each book has been pirated be determined?