Dotcom raid illegal

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I have a bunch of library books due today that I am still in the process of learning from. If only there was a way to let me read these books indefinitely while still allowing others to read them as well...

There is, it is called buying your own copy.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

There is, it is called buying your own copy.

Isn't the role of library to also provide access to out-of-print titles?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Ankh

Isn't the role of library to also provide access to out-of-print titles?

Well we were discussing eBooks, so out-of-print doesn't really apply, and for print books I think it is rather unlikely that a local lending library would have copies to lend of an out of print book that you couldn't find for sale if you looked hard enough.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Well we were discussing eBooks, so out-of-print doesn't really apply, and for print books I think it is rather unlikely that a local lending library would have copies to lend of an out of print book that you couldn't find for sale if you looked hard enough.

There are out-of-print ebooks which have been pulled from publication/sale. Sometimes it's because the author signed with a different publisher or decided to stop selling that version (perhaps they've folded several short stories into an anthology and no longer want to sell the singles). Or the author has died, and the heirs have decided they no longer want that books sold.

Local lending libraries usually contain a great many out of print pbooks which, potentially, could be found for sale "if you looked hard enough" (charming way to say "if you don't have spare time, research skills, and money to pay collector's edition prices, you don't deserve to read out-of-print books")--but libraries make them available for everyone, not just one purchaser.

I am intrigued (and annoyed) at the growing movement that seems to say books are for the wealthy, that people of limited resources don't really need and therefore shouldn't have access to the world's literature. It's been fascinating to see how "ebooks can't be resold or lent" gets turned into "libraries are supporting leeches; if you want to read, just BUY books."

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I am intrigued (and annoyed) at the growing movement that seems to say books are for the wealthy, that people of limited resources don't really need and therefore shouldn't have access to the world's literature. It's been fascinating to see how "ebooks can't be resold or lent" gets turned into "libraries are supporting leeches; if you want to read, just BUY books."

Much (most, perhaps?) of the world's great literature is in the public domain and can be downloaded entirely free of charge as eBooks.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I am intrigued (and annoyed) at the growing movement that seems to say books are for the wealthy, that people of limited resources don't really need and therefore shouldn't have access to the world's literature. It's been fascinating to see how "ebooks can't be resold or lent" gets turned into "libraries are supporting leeches; if you want to read, just BUY books."

Nice rant, but please read the post I was responding to:

I have a bunch of library books due today that I am still in the process of learning from. If only there was a way to let me read these books indefinitely while still allowing others to read them as well...

Libraries exist to lend a limited number of books for a limited amount of time each. If you want a permanent copy of a book, buy one.

(Or live in a country which is addressing the orphan works issue, like France and England)

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Much (most, perhaps?) of the world's great literature is in the public domain and can be downloaded entirely free of charge as eBooks.

While this is true, I don't like the growing sentiment that it's perfectly reasonable for the poor to have to limit their reading to books more than a hundred years old. Especially since I live in a country where the public domain won't gain new (non-government) works for another seven years--if copyright isn't retroactively extended again.

[HarryT]

I entirely agree with you, but is someone who's genuinely poor likely to have an eBook reader and internet access anyway? An eBook reader is very much a "luxury item", to my mind. Libraries are still available to those who wish to read paper books (which I live, at least).

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Much (most, perhaps?) of the world's great literature is in the public domain and can be downloaded entirely free of charge as eBooks.

If you have a computer and Internet access.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Catlady

If you have a computer and Internet access.

Exactly what I said in my next post .

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Well we were discussing eBooks, so out-of-print doesn't really apply, and for print books I think it is rather unlikely that a local lending library would have copies to lend of an out of print book that you couldn't find for sale if you looked hard enough.

With all due respect, I believe that the moment the library system is mentioned it is impossible to differentiate books by the medium. A book is a book, and a collection of books is likely to be called "a library" as long as that form exists. Out-of-print is still an issue in this age of e-book ascendancy, and it will remain so until we digitize every book, ever made.

Given enough time and resources, I could, most likely, find any out-of-print title available for checkout from the library. Alas, the time might become an issue (university project deadline), the required resources most certainly are. I refuse to treat a book as an entertainment good (offered for sale), despite the fact that most books printed today essentially are (cheap or not so cheap) entertainment packages. For me, universal access to medical system and universal access to knowledge (free internet access offered by the library), happen to be categories treated as civilization achievements, something well worth my tax dollars.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Um, no
For library lending, the copy is the primary purpose.

Really? I would think lending would be the primary purpose.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by JoeD

That said, it does not change my point. Libraries are still operating within the law.

So you're saying that the difference between libraries and pirates just comes down to "the law says so", not for any moral/ethical distinctions?

The law (as you/others have made me aware) allows them to loan paper books without agreement/fee, so they do. It does not however allow them to loan ebooks without a agreement/fee, so they either don't loan them, or they make the agreement.

Actually, nobody really knows what would happen if a library tried loaning ebooks without an agreement/fee.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Especially since I live in a country where the public domain won't gain new (non-government) works for another seven years--if copyright isn't retroactively extended again.

It's almost guaranteed to be extended.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's almost guaranteed to be extended.

Maybe...and maybe not.

The shooting down of SOPA has rearranged the I.P political landscape. Hollywood no longer has a certain lock on legal changes any more...