Is ebook piracy on the rise?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Jeff Duntemann

Worst of all, if random checks on readers and laptops (at borders, for example) start to focus on ebooks, and if people are forced to prove that they did not steal a particular title, ereading as a concept will be seen as dangerous and the market will not grow as quickly as it otherwise might.

Hmm... first I've heard of that little idea. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, though, for practical reasons:

1. Who at Borders will have the time to check and make judgements on people's readers? and
2. Would Borders want to risk alienating a customer and lose a sale?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by axel77

So this is the way a story looks tomorrow?

Maybe if the writer is particularly bad...

Seriously, though I said that the product placement idea has to be adjusted to fit the realities of literature. So, no, it won't read like that! Maybe more like this:

The guy chasing me was persistant, I'd give him that. But as I was in my Outback, and he was driving a Hummer, I knew that I'd be able to out-maneuver and out-distance him easily. At one point, I executed a quick left that almost flipped him over, giving me time to take a hit from my 7-Up before he recovered, and I was back on the gas.

Not so painful, eh?

[jakewastaken]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Hmm... first I've heard of that little idea. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, though, for practical reasons:

1. Who at Borders will have the time to check and make judgements on people's readers? and
2. Would Borders want to risk alienating a customer and lose a sale?

I laughed

[pwalker8]

A couple of points. First, I actually did buy several VHS tapes at $80 a pop. The first $20 VHS tape was the Wraith of Khan in 1982, well before Batman in 1989. It was a long time before they started to put commercials on tapes. Yes, they did do trailers, but the commercials didn't come until much later. So commercials had absolutely nothing to do with dropping the price. The price dropped because some smart marketeers figured out that they could make a lot more money saleing several hundred thousand tapes at $19.95 than they could saleing twenty thousand at $80. It was a big gamble for them, but it paid off big time and kick started the VHS tape business.

While product placement does generate some income for movies, the primary money streams for movies are tickets and video rights, not product placement.

[jakewastaken]

Well that's where I see things just a little differently. Contract or no, I will not bow to any sponsor.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by jakewastaken

Well that's where I see things just a little differently. Contract or no, I will not bow to any sponsor.

What does "bow to" mean? Does it mean you've never, ever gone to a movie or watched a TV show that was financed in part by product placement? (Why do I find that a bit hard to believe?)

Or does it mean you refuse to have a sponsor tell you what to put in your creative work? As the photo you so cannily applied suggests, product placement need not necessarily ruin a creative work, any more than the not-so-subtle display of dozens of Smirnoff bottles ruined Casino Royale.

Obviously, as a creator, it would be your choice. But as we've been discussing methods of making sure a creator gets paid, in an atmosphere where direct payment from consumers may not be feasible, you can always suggest other methods...

[jakewastaken]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

What does "bow to" mean? Does it mean you've never, ever gone to a movie or watched a TV show that was financed in part by product placement? (Why do I find that a bit hard to believe?)

Or does it mean you refuse to have a sponsor tell you what to put in your creative work? As the photo you so cannily applied suggests, product placement need not necessarily ruin a creative work, any more than the not-so-subtle display of dozens of Smirnoff bottles ruined Casino Royale.

Obviously, as a creator, it would be your choice. But as we've been discussing methods of making sure a creator gets paid, in an atmosphere where direct payment from consumers may not be feasible, you can always suggest other methods...

.......

It's a quote from Wayne's World...... I wasn't making a statement, I was referencing a product placement joke.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

but I don't see how anyone can morally justify downloading without either buying the eBook (if available) or the pBook (if not).

It is rather easy to motivate. You are a utilitarist and you believe your actions lead to more utility.

Why do you believe it is in principle hard to motivate?

[moz]

Originally Posted by HarryT

How very sad that you consider the viewpoint that "it's wrong not to pay authors for the books that you read" to be "nonsense" .

I'll say it again: paying the author every time I come into contact with their work is nonsense. I gave you a little list of things that you seem to think are stealing, and you seem to think that's an accurate picture. I'm sorry, I was trying to be sarcastic. You're right, i do think it's nonsense. Libraries especially are a huge resource and requiring that readers rent books from them would be IMO insane. It would, however, reward the authors in a way that you seem to think is appropriate.

Do you get paid for the work that you do or do you rely on voluntary contributions?

No, I get paid for the work that I do. At least sometimes, anyway. Once. After that the work belongs to whoever bought it, and they don't have to pay me when they profit from it. They don't have to pay me when they use it, whether they profit from that use or not.

To give you some tiny glimmer of a suggestion of what I do, almost nothing that I produce is physical. Almost all the value can be copied for very little cost, and I do almost nothing to prevent that (in fact I encourage it).

So if your question was "does Moz depend on copyright law to make a living?" the answer is "no". But if you meant "do I produce intellectual property that is covered by copyright law" the answer is most definitely yes. Do I sell that copyright? No. Would people pay me without copyright law? Yes, of course, otherwise I wouldn't do the work for them. They pay for the "right to direct", not the "right to own".

Here's a question for you: is the value in my work on www.moz.geek.nz/mozbike physical or intangible? What makes that site valuable in a way that (say) www.trisled.com.au is not?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by moz

Libraries especially are a huge resource and requiring that readers rent books from them would be IMO insane. It would, however, reward the authors in a way that you seem to think is appropriate.

I'm somewhat puzzled by why you think that this is my view, Moz - I have said at least three times on this thread that libraries are a major source of revenue for many authors. Libraries BUY the books that they lend to their readers. If 1000 libraries have a copy of a book, that's 1000 sales for the author.

Here's a question for you: is the value in my work on www.moz.geek.nz/mozbike physical or intangible? What makes that site valuable in a way that (say) www.trisled.com.au is not?

I'll look at it and get back to you on that.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by jakewastaken

.......

It's a quote from Wayne's World...... I wasn't making a statement, I was referencing a product placement joke.

Oh, well... been too long since I saw the movie, I guess.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tompe

It is rather easy to motivate. You are a utilitarist and you believe your actions lead to more utility.

Why do you believe it is in principle hard to motivate?

It's not a question of motivation... we know your motivation (to not pay for the things you get). The question is how you morally justify not paying for someone else's work?

[Olympus]

I would like to create morde ripples in this discussion

1: As some her like to compare the e-book piracy with software, I ould like to point out that even in software world we have/had "share-ware", "card-ware", "free-ware"
ZIP, Total Commander, WinAmp are some of the products I used for years as shareware, yet when I had the means to pay the creators for their work I finally did.
I guestimate that for each payed shareware version 100 versions are not payed for - could somebody explain to me why this seems to be OK for software but not for e-books

2: e/p books are most likely consumed one time much unlike music tracks.
A person is likely to reuse a particular mp3-track without too much effort.
DVD's are now reasonabily priced that can watch a movie in the comfort of my own house for the price of 2 persons that go to a theatre.
I do give/lend my p-books to friends and family as I will almost certainly not reread a book (just too much on my to-read pile :-)

3: publishers do not scream too much over the "lost" sales of audio books.
Why do they fear e-book "piracy" yet they accept a-book piracy so easily

[pdurrant]

1. Releasing software as shareware or freeware is the programmer's choice. If an author wished to release an eBook as shareware or freeware, there's no problem with that. Why do you think it's a problem for eBooks?

2. Because they don't see audio books as their main income source, I'd guess.

Paul

Originally Posted by Olympus

I would like to create morde ripples in this discussion

1: As some her like to compare the e-book piracy with software, I ould like to point out that even in software world we have/had "share-ware", "card-ware", "free-ware"
ZIP, Total Commander, WinAmp are some of the products I used for years as shareware, yet when I had the means to pay the creators for their work I finally did.
I guestimate that for each payed shareware version 100 versions are not payed for - could somebody explain to me why this seems to be OK for software but not for e-books

2: e/p books are most likely consumed one time much unlike music tracks.
A person is likely to reuse a particular mp3-track without too much effort.
DVD's are now reasonabily priced that can watch a movie in the comfort of my own house for the price of 2 persons that go to a theatre.
I do give/lend my p-books to friends and family as I will almost certainly not reread a book (just too much on my to-read pile :-)

2: publishers do not scream too much over the "lost" sales of audio books.
Why do they fear e-book "piracy" yet they accept a-book piracy so easily

[Format C:]

Originally Posted by rhadin

...The RIAA abuses the American judicial system because it has the money to do so, not because it is right.

And what's the difference between "to have the money" and "to be right"?