What is piracy?

[Joshua.P]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

That's format shifting. My purchase of a Depeche Mode CD back in 1986 does not entitle me to free upgrades in new formats in perpetuity. Why would ebooks be any different?

So what if a friend gave you the mp3? You would get all pompous and say "You are not entitled to give this to me, and I am not entitled to receive this."

[AlbertaCowboy]

[QUOTE=Joshua.P;2098025] You would get all pompous...[SNIP] QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Joshua.P;2097376]You guys are really strange you know that? [SNIP]QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Joshua.P;2098017]I'm not saying there was a crime crazy cat lady,[SNIP]QUOTE]

You aren't doing your own argument any favours by name calling and labelling other members of the forum, man.

[AndrewH]

Originally Posted by Joshua.P

So what if a friend gave you the mp3? You would get all pompous and say "You are not entitled to give this to me, and I am not entitled to receive this."

Did they purchase it as a gift for me, or did they purchase it for themselves and they're giving me an illegal copy?

[nogle]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

Did they purchase it as a gift for me, or did they purchase it for themselves and they're giving me an illegal copy?

Be careful. With that profile picture, you are going to get yourself labelled as a crazy cat man.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Joshua.P

I'm not saying there was a crime crazy cat lady, I am in agreement with you on this matter. I asked how it was any different to what I said in my earlier post, and which you seemed to have some issue with, saying it was "ridiculous to justify".

Why should it be any different if it was a TV broadcast? So the logo makes it all perfectly A-Okay huh?

You don't see a distinction between going to a movie theater and owning a copy of the movie? One does not entitle you to the other. You paid for a single viewing, in a particular location. By your logic, I suppose that the next day you could have gone back to the theater without buying another ticket.

I bought what started out as a duly authorized and sold copy of the movie. It was intended to be watched on my home screen. I format shifted so that I could watch it on my home screen. My format shifting in this case was not direct because of a failure of my recording equipment, but the end result was exactly the same and there was no collateral damage along the way.

[Dulin's Books]

Originally Posted by Joshua.P

Why are you making such a big fuss HansTWN? I saw the movie at the cinema, so I already rewarded the creator. Whats the big deal if I download to watch it again?

right. so you listen to a song on the radio and then you can go take a cd of it without paying for it??

[Dulin's Books]

Originally Posted by Joshua.P

So what if a friend gave you the mp3? You would get all pompous and say "You are not entitled to give this to me, and I am not entitled to receive this."

no need to get pompous. i just politely decline and suggest i will go buy it.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

If everyone got their books from the library, then libraries would have to buy a lot more books, thus the authors would get more money. But if authors were forbidden to sell their books to readers (as you have advocated in previous posts), and instead could only sell them to libraries, that would be a monumental violation of free speech. Power would be taken entirely out of the hands of readers.

Let's just imagine all markets and all computer servers, and all book warehouses/public libraries as part of the global public library. Why shouldn't we imagine these things as thus? Isn't it imperative that we all read as much as we can in order to advance the condition?

Perhaps it is the idea of selling that is wrong.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Dulin's Books

right. so you listen to a song on the radio and then you can go take a cd of it without paying for it??

Home taping is killing music? LOL!

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Why shouldn't we imagine these things as thus? Isn't it imperative that we all read as much as we can in order to advance the condition?

Looks like you pirated too many horror movies, since you are constantly coming up with ideas for such nightmarish scenarios.

[AndrewH]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Isn't it imperative that we all read as much as we can in order to advance the condition?

What condition?

Perhaps it is the idea of selling that is wrong.

Money has been around at least 5,000 years, and barter has been around thousands of years prior. The idea of selling isn't "wrong", and it's a lot better than slavery or beating people over the head with a club and taking what you want.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

What condition?


Money has been around at least 5,000 years, and barter has been around thousands of years prior. The idea of selling isn't "wrong", and it's a lot better than slavery or beating people over the head with a club and taking what you want.

The human condition

5000-50000 ain't too long IMO. Money has been a nice experiment for sure, but I can't say whether or not that kind of trade has been very helpful. It is quite obvious that this system allows for one to gain much while at the same time causing others to lose just as much...

Yes the idea of beating someone over the head and taking their stuff is a bad idea, better to collaborate? Or simply give it all away??

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Isn't it imperative that we all read as much as we can in order to advance the condition?

I don't understand the question.

Recently I have been reading books about North Korea. Does that count?

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Perhaps it is the idea of selling that is wrong.

That is the normal justification given for a currency reform. People have been selling stuff and making money, and we have to put a stop to it.

If there is any lesson of history, it's that when you eliminate competing centers of power, that leaves us with the government having absolute power, which it will soon use. Now, just like the government, competing centers of power can get too strong. That's one reason why we have anti-trust. If the Justice Department anti-trust division was to be transformed into an anti-selling division, we would have North Korea.

If this thread teaches us anything, it should be that free people, in concert, will no more accept copyright enforced by strong criminal sanctions than they will accept abolition of copyright. Freedom requires some messiness.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

It is quite obvious that this system allows for one to gain much while at the same time causing others to lose just as much...

You really need to read some basic economic textbooks more carefully. There is overwhelming evidence for this, on average, being mistaken.

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Yes the idea of beating someone over the head and taking their stuff is a bad idea, better to collaborate? Or simply give it all away??

Fine. But if I tell you to go stuff your own stuff and leave my stuff alone, then advancing your utopia requires you to use violence to force me to collaborate.

Ain't nobody stopping you from giving all of your stuff away.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Yes the idea of beating someone over the head and taking their stuff is a bad idea, better to collaborate? Or simply give it all away??

Well, why don't you make a start and give your computer and e-reader away?

Or are you advocating that the government gives away free clubs to hit "unwilling donors" over the head with?