Is digital copyright incompatible with technology and / or democracy?

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

The point is that if someone hasn't paid for something I have created, I don't want them enjoying the fruits of my labour. Period.

Yet, I'll bet you enjoy the fruits of other people's labor for free all the time.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by wizwor

Yet, I'll bet you enjoy the fruits of other people's labor for free all the time.

Well sure, but "other people's" labor probably doesn't count.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Most of those people probably wouldn't have paid for it in the first place.

The people buying it on Ebay might, assuming they knew where else they could buy it from. Unless it's just something on one of those 5,000 Warez Appz compilation CDs.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

The people buying it on Ebay might, assuming they knew where else they could buy it from.

True, or it might mean that his price is causing them to look elsewhere. Of course, for all we know his software might be being sold second hand on Ebay.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

As long as the creator (or owner) isn't giving what they created away for free, nobody should be enjoying that product for free. I've never heard a reason, motivation or excuse that have even come close to altering my views on this.

There are so many legal ways to enjoy content (I speak of books here) for free - they're called libraries. I've read blog posts by some authors who are indignant of even THAT.

Paraphrasing here, "I am the author of Name of Book. I receive fan mail sometimes from people praising my work up and down, only to get to the end of the email and find out that they've read it at the library!"

Indignance at piracy I can understand, but authors quickly lose me when I've done the right thing and "waited in line" for my hold to come in and given the book back after I was done, only to find it to be marginally better than piracy in the eyes of the author.

Is shelling out money I don't have the only "real way" to honor an author?

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

There are so many legal ways to enjoy content (I speak of books here) for free - they're called libraries.

Libraries are not free. I think you meant to say that there are so many ways to get other people to pay for content you enjoy.

We really need to appreciate that other people are paying for the 'free' things we enjoy. Sometimes they are donating their time, other times they are donating their money, most of the time, they are paying their taxes.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by wizwor

Libraries are not free. I think you meant to say that there are so many ways to get other people to pay for content you enjoy.

We really need to appreciate that other people are paying for the 'free' things we enjoy. Sometimes they are donating their time, other times they are donating their money, most of the time, they are paying their taxes.

Everyone who pays taxes pays for our library (including me). I also have paid overdue fines from time to time, as well as readily paid the replacement cost for lost/damaged material that was my responsibility.

[wizwor]

so, not free, right?

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by wizwor

so, not free, right?

I think free was meant in the context of not paying the author for every person that reads the book. Obviously libraries have operating/acquisition costs, and that money comes from somewhere. That's not quite the same thing though.

[wizwor]

Maybe. In my town, the public library drove blockbuster out of business. Most people came for the 'free' movies. A few stayed for the books. For the cost of funding this kiosk, we could have paid for every family to have a Netflix streaming subscription PLUS a subscription to a library in a neighboring community. Public libraries are not inexpensive.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by andyh2000

Edited to add: I also thought it (copyright infringement) was subject to civil law, not criminal.

Andrew

HarryT uses "crime" and "criminal" as an insult without any meaning. As was demonstrated in another thread.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

I think free was meant in the context of not paying the author for every person that reads the book. Obviously libraries have operating/acquisition costs, and that money comes from somewhere. That's not quite the same thing though.

Yeah. I have read hundreds of books from the library, and only paid for the few I wanted to buy (keep).

When I say "libraries let you legally read books for free", I meant in the context that I can walk in, take home a bag full of books, not owe anyone anything unless they are lost, stolen, damaged, or overdue.

I think I've borrowed already in 2012, nearly 60-70 items and not paid a cent. That was the point I was trying to make, and the fact that the costs (to pay operating costs for the library) are absorbed by taxes doesn't take away from the fact that anyone can "access content for free".

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Kirtai

I suppose that technically, they do but since there are an array of functionally identical vehicles available it's not actually a problem.

Books can't normally be substituted that way. e.g. Can you get another book that's a full substitute for Falling Free? (Functions to replace: First book in Vorkosigan saga, first book with quaddies, only book with character Leo Graf).

As an aside, Bujolds books are awesome. (please ignore the hideous covers)

If you have your heart set on a particular model of car, then (by your logic) the maker of that car has a monopoly. Same with a book. You might also think, hey I will just read another good murder mystery if you wanted to read a particular one and it was too expensive. Books are not completely interchangeable, but you can easily find something else interesting to read, on the same subject. My point being, your use completely devalues the word monopoly. That should be used for market dominance of a product category, it shouldn't apply to virtually every single, non-commodity product on the planet.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by wizwor

Libraries are not free. I think you meant to say that there are so many ways to get other people to pay for content you enjoy.

We really need to appreciate that other people are paying for the 'free' things we enjoy. Sometimes they are donating their time, other times they are donating their money, most of the time, they are paying their taxes.

Absolutely. My original post, though, was not about whether libraries are technically "free", (although a person can access content, for a temporary period, for free, to check it out) it was about my finding it odd that some authors' blog posts have equated library borrowing with piracy.

I most certainly appreciate that I can not only borrow a book for free (FSVO "free") but I don't even have to leave my home like I used to and personally request at a desk for my name to be put on the waiting list. I can do that on line. But yes, there are legal ways to enjoy content for free.

I am incredibly fussy about what type of content I want to welcome into my life as a permanent fixture, I am very hard to please when it comes to books. So being able to borrow for free from the library has helped me to narrow down who/what my favorites actually are when it comes to allocation of entertainment budget.

In the past I have bought so much garbage based on "recommendations" that when it came to actually owning books I couldn't live without my money had already been spent, so when I started using the library it made deciding painless.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

Paraphrasing here, "I am the author of Name of Book. I receive fan mail sometimes from people praising my work up and down, only to get to the end of the email and find out that they've read it at the library!"

Paraphasing? How about actual examples of authors who have significant library sales being foolish enough to say this?

Going the other way, I live in a rather affluent community (not my block so much!) with a fair number of writers. It's surprisingly common for me to take a book out the public library and find the author has signed it.

With eBooks, where the library pays a lot more for a copy than does an individual, the author would be particularly foolish to resent library readers.