Is ebook piracy on the rise?

[HarryT]

Picky, picky...

[Sparrow]

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

Again, I don't think you can keep up this "discrete units of culture" thought. Electronic media is endlessly reproducible at zero additional cost. Usage count is what, um, counts - not unique copies, as they won't exist any longer. Or at least not exclusively.

Yes, the production and per-unit cost equations have changed forever, thanks to digital media. But this does not address the essential fact that people who produce those creative works, whatever the per-unit cost, deserve to be compensated for their work, just like any other worker. Discussion about production differences and unit costs merely obscures the real point of this discussion.

Do you believe that creative people have no right to make money from their work? Do you believe that you, as a consumer, have no responsibility to compensate an artist, not even a dime, for a work you obtain? Do you, as a consumer, believe that you and you alone should have the final say on what someone else deserves to make from their work?

And if you do believe these things... how do you expect artists to make a living, and thereby afford the time it takes to create the works you crave? And knowing they cannot profit from their efforts, why should an artist even bother to create works someone else will simply steal?

These are the issues concerning piracy... not per-unit costs, copyright details, or DRM. Being fair to the creators must be addressed, not obscured by cost debates and endless semantics.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Do you believe that creative people have no right to make money from their work? Do you believe that you, as a consumer, have no responsibility to compensate an artist, not even a dime, for a work you obtain?

We have people on this thread who have clearly stated "no" as the answer to that question, Steve .

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Why is it right for an author to take from the public domain and not give back?

I'm downright sure I'm going to regret this, but... what exactly prompted this question? Have I been skimming this thread too much, or is this an issue that was raised elsewhere? Specifically, what are you referring to?

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Do you believe that creative people have no right to make money from their work? Do you believe that you, as a consumer, have no responsibility to compensate an artist, not even a dime, for a work you obtain? Do you, as a consumer, believe that you and you alone should have the final say on what someone else deserves to make from their work?

Speaking of semantics, I would appreciate it if you did not take my words out of context (I was addressing someone who was trying to apply the unique-physical-copy-of-something structure to the digital age and I was arguing we should look at usage count), okay? Thanks.

As for what I believe, I do believe the author should be compensated. Not the entire information control structure that has grown fat around them, which brings us right back to square one - the system is broken.

Also, consumers ultimately decide what people make from their work - we call this free market, supply and demand, and so forth.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by HarryT

We have people on this thread who have clearly stated "no" as the answer to that question, Steve .

Amazingly enough. And now I await responses to the questions I posed in my third paragraph.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

Speaking of semantics, I would appreciate it if you did not take my words out of context (I was addressing someone who trying to apply the physical-copy-of-something structure to the digital age and I was arguing we should look at usage count), okay? Thanks.

I know what you were saying. And I repeat, to both of you: It's dancing around the real issue.

Originally Posted by acidzebra

As for what I believe, I do believe the author should be compensated. Not the entire information control structure that has grown fat around them, which brings us right back to square one - the system is broken.

The system may be broken, but that does not excuse theft. If you don't like the system, don't even patronize them. Tell them why. Make it clear to them that what they are doing is broken. Simply stealing from them only reinforces their desire to bolster security, driving up costs to compensate for their losses, while it says nothing to them about their publishing system.

In short, piracy only reinforces the need for the very things that promote piracy.

[acidzebra]

No, it is not dancing around the real issue. All these issues are interconnected. Copyright and length thereof. Content owners and content creators. Digital media. Our common culture.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

In short, piracy only reinforces the need for the very things that promote piracy.

There is no real way to stop it save for shutting down the entire internet, every computer connected to it, and destroying all the digital media out there. The genie is out of the bottle, and calling people thieves and blathering on about the moral issue - that is dancing around the real issues. People who try to take our common culture and try to lock it up behind steel gates - those are the real thieves.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

There is no real way to stop it save for shutting down the entire internet, every computer connected to it, and destroying all the digital media out there. The genie is out of the bottle, and calling people thieves and blathering on about the moral issue - that is dancing around the real issues.

With the very greatest respect, acidzebra, moral issues lie at the heart of it.

Let me ask you this: why don't you steal food rather than buy it from a shop? I would hazzard a guess that it's not because you're afraid of the punishment if you're caught stealing, but because you think that it's fundamentally wrong to steal.

I know that downloading books illegally isn't stealing, but the fundamental question still remains: is it right or wrong? We have a person on this thread who's clearly said that he knows it's wrong, but he still does it. What can we do to change the attitude of people like Jake?

People who try to take our common culture and try to lock it up behind steel gates - those are the real thieves.

Again, with the greatest respect, writing books is just a job like any other job - it's not "our common culture". When I write a book, I have the right to sell it for profit just as I would if I were selling, say, sandwiches. Your choice, in a "law-abiding" world, is to decide whether or not you want to buy my sandwich/book, not say "I'm going to take it anyway without paying for it." or "I think you're charging to much for it, so I'm going to take it without paying for it".

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I know that downloading books illegally isn't stealing, but the fundamental question still remains: is it right or wrong? We have a person on this thread who's clearly said that he knows it's wrong, but he still does it. What can we do to change the attitude of people like Jake?

Why should we though? Let him who is without sin cast the first stone; motes and logs, and all that.
We're none of us saints (I imagine).

Imho, theft isn't the issue.
Publishers and writers profit from theft when they take money extorted by taxation to pay for books bought by libraries and schools.
They don't complain about the theft that benefits them, but they do complain about theft that disadvantages them.

The only issue here is self-interest.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by HarryT

With the very greatest respect, acidzebra, moral issues lie at the heart of it.

I do agree in part, just not about where those moral issue lie - I think they lie on both sides of the fence, both with content consumers and with current content owners (as distinct from content producers).

Originally Posted by HarryT

Let me ask you this: why don't you steal food rather than buy it from a shop? I would hazzard a guess that it's not because you're afraid of the punishment if you're caught stealing, but because you think that it's fundamentally wrong to steal.

Harry, I am very pessimistic about human nature. I think enlightened self-interest is the best you can hope for in people. Even when people perform completely altruistic deeds I always look at it in terms of "what do they get out of it?" - and usually the answer in that case is they get to feel better about themselves. So the reason that shoplifting is less prevalent than copying mp3s is related to the fact that in shoplifting you do have to take physical objects, you do have to evade detection, and you do run the real risk of getting caught. I do not think "intrinsically wrong" is stopping people from shoplifting at all. For most people it is often simpler to just pay for the product.

The reason the iTunes store is so successful is because they make it more convenient to just grab it from there (not to mention the comparatively attractive price point) than it is to go out and find reasonable-quality pirated copies of everything.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I know that downloading books illegally isn't stealing, but the fundamental question still remains: is it right or wrong? We have a person on this thread who's clearly said that he knows it's wrong, but he still does it. What can we do to change the attitude of people like Jake?

I don't think you can (I also think it is a bit presumptuous to think you can). So you have to do your work on the other side of the fence in the form of finding/creating/inventing the iTunes Store for books. Which I have suggested with the e-library model earlier.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Again, with the greatest respect, writing books is just a job like any other job - it's not "our common culture". When I write a book, I have the right to sell it for profit just as I would if I were selling, say, sandwiches.

A side effect of trying to run culture as a business. I do not think writing books, making music, or making a painting is just like any job - in my work as a network administrator, nothing I will do will make a lasting impression on people like, say, the works of Shakespeare have. There is a fundamental difference.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

A side effect of trying to run culture as a business. I do not think writing books, making music, or making a painting is just like any job - in my work as a network administrator, nothing I will do will make a lasting impression on people like, say, the works of Shakespeare have. There is a fundamental difference.

Let's suppose you write a network administration tool in C or Java. Legally, that's protected by exactly the same laws that protect books. You have the write to sell it, and to require that anyone who uses it pays you for it. Would you argue for that right to be taken away from you? Do you see a fundamental difference between writing computer software and writing books? I'd argue that both are creative activities, myself, having done both.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Let's suppose you write a network administration tool in C or Java. Legally, that's protected by exactly the same laws that protect books. You have the right to sell it, and to require that anyone who uses it pays you for it. Would you argue for that right to be taken away from you? Do you see a fundamental difference between writing computer software and writing books? I'd argue that both are creative activities, myself, having done both.

Actually, my company probably gains the rights to whatever content I produce during work hours (there's that whole content producer/content owner thing again!). That aside, I am still really uncertain on the whole concept of charging people for strings of bits that operate on other bits. And finally, in my free time I am very much into open-source and free (as in beer) software. I've taken from it, I've modified it, I've contributed to it.

But I appreciate what you are trying to say, I just doubt my C program will become an ubiquitous part of common culture much as Shakespeare's works have become - and I doubt that any single program ever will.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

But I appreciate what you are trying to say, I just doubt my C program will become an ubiquitous part of common culture much as Shakespeare's works have become - and I doubt that any single program ever will.

It's interesting that you should use Shakespeare as an example . He's the classic example of a man who was writing simply as a job to put food on the table. He wasn't a wealthly nobleman who wrote as a hobby or for cultural reasons, but just as a job to make a living. If he hadn't been able to make money from his writing (by people buying tickets for the plays he wrote), he certainly couldn't have afforded to do it.