Is ebook piracy on the rise?

[axel77]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

explain to me the difference between a paper version and an e-book version. Same content. The author gets royalties from the paper and legal e-book version. Not so from the illegal download. So in that respect, something is being taken....

The difference is:

a) going to library, picking a paper book, putting it under your jacket when nobody looks, get out with that book,

b) going to library, bring your PC&Scanner (lets suppose the local librarian really doesn't watch/care) pick a book, sit in a corner, scan in the book, put the book back into the self. Go home with the scanned content.

---
Both is not legal/okay.

But a is worse than b. Since in b you take the content without showing the society per money (or any other way) that this content is worth something and was a good idea to write, while in a) you steal the content like in b but additionaly the paper, and its costs of print/transport and so.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

I don't think its right that others can edit your posts. Only those who post, or a moderator, should be able to edit......Moderators? Is there anything than can be done about this? It can get out of control really easily.......

They are not editing each others posts. They are editing the quote when they respond. The originals are not being touched here. Only moderators can edit originals.

Dale

[jakewastaken]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

so.........pirating is just buying a used book? Oh, wait, I PAID for that used book. Its legal! Now, the book my friend gave me? SHE paid for it. At one point, someone paid for all those used books. At one point, the author did get royalties. But in the case of illegal downloads? Not one dime.......okay, ready for your next shot...........

It wasn't my argument! I was just explaining the difference that exists between the two. Come on now, you know they are not the same no matter how much you wish they were.

I should have just left it to Axel to explain. I'm not throwing my hat back into the ring here. I was just trying to help clarify feigned confusion.

I obviously bit trollbait and only added to confusion by introducing a broken analogy. Son of a bitch.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

so.........pirating is just buying a used book? Oh, wait, I PAID for that used book. Its legal! Now, the book my friend gave me? SHE paid for it. At one point, someone paid for all those used books. At one point, the author did get royalties. But in the case of illegal downloads? Not one dime.......okay, ready for your next shot...........

I don't agree with the piracy/used book analogy. The analogy fails because there is just one physical copy of that book. Data can be replicated at will without any additional cost. Which is the same problem the music industry currently faces, and the TV guys, and the movie guys.

In the digital domain, replication/multiplication occurs without significant additional investment beyond the first effort.

Here's a weird artifact of the digital age: if my TV station broadcasts a movie, I am free to record it on my VCR (I think!) for private use or, more recently, PVR. However, if I forget to schedule my VCR/PVR or just prefer to download the same broadcast from a P2P net later, I might get sued. The claim is usually that since with modern p2p protocols I upload while I download, I enable others. Of course, I have no knowledge of the situation of these others - whether or not they have the "personal" right to download this data.

Another thing, and forgive me if I stay on the TV analogy - TV usually comes with commercials. While I am free to go out and take a piss during these commercials, or talk to others, or just not pay attention, if I _cut_ these commercials before viewing it (also known as time-shifting), some people would say I am doing illegal things.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by jakewastaken

It wasn't my argument! I was just explaining the difference that exists between the two. Come on now, you know they are not the same no matter how much you wish they were.

I should have just left it to Axel to explain. I'm not throwing my hat back into the ring here. I was just trying to help clarify feigned confusion.

I obviously bit trollbait and only added to confusion by introducing a broken analogy. Son of a bitch.

no no......didn't mean to upset, again, after all the work we went thru to get where we are.......

[axel77]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

if I _cut_ these commercials before viewing it (also known as time-shifting), some people would say I am doing illegal things.

oh this remembers me so much of scene I think it was from Fahrenheit 451 (but not sure):

A: Look here, did you see? This TV got an off switch!

B: Huh. Thats illegal!
--
Sorry couldn't find the original words...

[gollu]

One very important thing that's missing from the discussion is :Where does the piracy becomes a major problem?
If we open any survey, it'll rank China as a N1 world pirate, Eastern Europe/ex USSR republics and India next.
Why do those countries lead in piracy? It's simple, because residents have low income, some places as low as $200-$300. Yet, compared to US for example, most of the goods have higher prices (oil, cars, electronics, clothes, etc). So how do people there survive? They use intelligence property at all levels for free, including ebooks.
There's no chance people in 3rd world countries will pay $10 for a book.
So generally - Yes, there are places that piracy in general and ebook piracy in specific will be on the rise for the next few decades...

[jakewastaken]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

no no......didn't mean to upset, again, after all the work we went thru to get where we are.......

It's cool, we're all good. I think we need to spend more time reading and less time debating.

[axel77]

Originally Posted by gollu

Where does the piracy becomes a major problem?

I think you are hitting the head on a nail here.

The important question is always to your code of conduct, what would happen, if everybody would do it? (this boils down to Kants Imperative)

What would happen if nobody would buy any books, but all download it for free?

Well the publishing system would break down, there would be far less books, and far less good quality books. Still there might be people who still do it for the heck of it, but you couldn't life by it, and it sure would make a lot fewer people do books.

This questions gets altered by people who say, to the question "What would happen when book downloading/sharing wouldn't be illegal? Well people would still buy paper books. And as the situation is still currently I'm inclined to agree, because books were always nicer to hold in hand than to read infront of a screen. But especially it are the eInk devices we adore here so much, who would change the answer to this question.

Same with the time-shifitng (cutting out of commercials) What would happen if everybody gets himself a device to remove the commercials, Well you can expect free tv soon to be a goner. Maybe pay-tv and public tv gets rise but understadable free (commercial driven) TV would have no chance if so technology would be wide spread and not illegalized.

Now with that imperative there come the same problems as has been pointed out to kants imperative, What is the *maxime* of your own doing? To some degree this can be freely altered at will:
Now what has done by some people here is to change the first question to:
What would happen if everybody who has less than X dollars income per month, downloads his books for free?

The answer is here honestly: Nothing. Book market would run as usual, if everbody would stick to such a rule. But its 1) difficult to assess who has how much money. 2) I see the lobby of "poor people" especially week, so its not gonna go into any legalization.

However one can go as a hypocrite and make the maxime, "What is if everybody who was born in 1977 can download books for free?" ... well you see it gets strange

What I consider important is some rights we were used to since ever. And which are on the stake now. Like Can we still borrow our copy of anything we bought to our neighbour? We always could as a book. And it was also because the answer to question [i]What would happen if everybody could lend his books to his neighbours and friends[i] Was up until now, nothing much, people would still buy books. This is going to change due to the global online-ness. When you neighbour is suddendly everyone in the world, things start to get complicated, even when I swear I'm not goin borrowed g to look at the file I "borrowed" to my friend (who lives on another continent) while he is using it, until he "gives it back" (after which he doesn't use it)

[jakewastaken]

Originally Posted by axel77

I think you are hitting the head on a nail here.

The important question is always to your code of conduct, what would happen, if everybody would do it? (this boils down to Kants Imperative)

What would happen if nobody would buy any books, but all download it for free?

Well the publishing system would break down, there would be far less books, and far less good quality books. Still there might be people who still do it for the heck of it, but you couldn't life by it, and it sure would make a lot fewer people do books.
it)

This would only apply to books yet to be published. If everyone stole and pirated books the trillions of already published books would not simply disappear overnight. There are already more books in existence than any one of us could ever read, but yeah, it'd put a damper on new books or force the industry to become more creative and daring in their future endeavors.

I agree with a lot of what you have to say though, especially the innate complexity of this ever more connected world.

[axel77]

Originally Posted by jakewastaken

force the industry to become more creative and daring in their future endeavors.

Anything you could suggest?

Also note that most books are written as personal endeavours by single, freelance authors in the hope to get it accepted by a publisher and at least get their pre-pays for that work.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by axel77

Anything you could suggest?

Also note that most books are written as personal endeavours by single, freelance authors in the hope to get it accepted by a publisher and at least get their pre-pays for that work.

Well that is exactly the point, isn't it? Who knows? It is uncharted territory. All that is obvious is that the old methods of control and enforcement are failing in the digital age, and all the more reason to experiment and not to cling to the old ways.

[axel77]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

Well that is exactly the point, isn't it? Who knows? It is uncharted territory. All that is obvious is that the old methods of control and enforcement are failing in the digital age, and all the more reason to experiment and not to cling to the old ways.

Possibly they are failing to some degree, but to some degree they always have failed, and there were always "special cases" where the results of copyright law just got so against common sense and moral everone but some of the most cunning publishers get a red head when hearing it like:

As said before not being able to borrow your VCR recorded broadcast to your friend.

Special case that hit the newspapers some years before, a publishers going against the boy scouts, because they not only sang copyprotected songs at the fireplace, they even performed them.. The allegation were dropped due to hugh bad press.

Or as some news pointed out in that debatte about the boy scouts, the song "happy birthday" is too copyprotected, so you might be very wary when and under which audience you perform it. (And yes, when you do an amateur movie for public performance you may definetly not sing happy birthday in that movie...)

-------------------

However I can fully understand the current industry trying to clutch to the old system, altough the "specialcases" in the grand total it did work okay, didn't it? And they the old schemes are not "failing" by themselves, all you currently see are efforts to keep this schemes in place, and to some degree it can work...

I think its troublesome to tear down a system because its old, without having any possible suggestion how another one could work. Lets point one out, and maybe you can get more followers. But just actively destroying without having a working replacement? I dunno...

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by axel77

I think its troublesome to tear down a system because its old, without having any possible suggestion how another one could work. Lets point one out, and maybe you can get more followers. But just actively destroying without having a working replacement? I dunno...

You might misunderstand, I am not saying "tear down the system", nor do I particularly wish to. I am simply noting that in my opinion, it is being torn down by the very nature of digital information and its effects on traditional methods of controlling and disseminating information.

So with that in mind, it might be best to experiment with alternate methods (like many indie bands are already doing, or the likes of Doctorow) now, before you find yourself at the bottom of a tar pit wondering what happened (dramatization, of course).

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by axel77

oh this remembers me so much of scene I think it was from Fahrenheit 451 (but not sure):

A: Look here, did you see? This TV got an off switch!

B: Huh. Thats illegal!
--
Sorry couldn't find the original words...

You sure your not thinking of 1984?

BOb