"Most e-books in The Netherlands are not paid for."

[Sil_liS]

Anti-piracy propaganda would be more effective if they wouldn't resort to lies and misdirection.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Anti-piracy propaganda would be more effective if they wouldn't resort to lies and misdirection.

Pretty hard not to, as in the Netherlands downloading from (what would elsewhere be completely illegal) torrents is perfectly legal.

Anti-piracy propaganda that doesn't use lies and misdirection here is pretty much just advertising for the other side (also propaganda pretty much by definition uses misdirection, lies are optional).

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

How does that tax revenue get back to the authors whose works are being pirated? ie, if I am an author, how do I claim my cut of the revenue?

I suppose it works in a similar way that tax on video tapes worked.

Also the books are not pirated by the person downloading them. It is the distribution that is illegal (I assumed you implied that pirating was bad).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tompe

I suppose it works in a similar way that tax on video tapes worked.

Can you explain how that worked, please? It's not a system I'm familiar with. ie how does an individual author get compensated by the process?

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Pretty hard not to, as in the Netherlands downloading from (what would elsewhere be completely illegal) torrents is perfectly legal.

Internet providers even advertise with slogans such as "Download all your movies and music even faster!". Well... you can only do that if it's legal to download that stuff.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Can you explain how that worked, please? It's not a system I'm familiar with. ie how does an individual author get compensated by the process?

I don't know how it works, exactly. We pay extra taxes on a lot of media and devices such as hard drives, flash cards, USB sticks, entire computers, CD/DVD's, DVD-recorders and so on. That money is then distributed to several organizations, who then give it to the artists. This distribution is handled by "distribution keys" (is that the correct word in English? Dutch: "verdeelsleutel", which is a pre-determined way of distributing the money), but i don't know how those "keys" are determined.

[Yapyap]

We have a similar blank recording media levy, which is collected and then distributed once a year to authors and other relevant parties.

I don't know the exact structure, but I think there's a commission deciding on the distribution, and I'm pretty sure that it only concerns local authors/creators, and only those who have joined the relevant authors'/creators' organisations.

I haven't heard of anything similar (yet) about books, but as far as the recording media levy goes, authors seem to be quite happy with the system. Probably not the least because - I'd assume - the overwhelming majority of actual downloads/pirated content is by foreign authors/artists, while all the income goes to local authors/artists...

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

We have a similar blank recording media levy, which is collected and then distributed once a year to authors and other relevant parties.

I don't know the exact structure, but I think there's a commission deciding on the distribution, and I'm pretty sure that it only concerns local authors/creators, and only those who have joined the relevant authors'/creators' organisations.

I haven't heard of anything similar (yet) about books, but as far as the recording media levy goes, authors seem to be quite happy with the system. Probably not the least because - I'd assume - the overwhelming majority of actual downloads/pirated content is by foreign authors/artists, while all the income goes to local authors/artists...

And don't forget that a lot of blank media is bought which will never be filled with any pirated stuff... (media is cd's, dvd's, hdd's, mp3 players, tablets: in short everything that can hold data)

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

And don't forget that a lot of blank media is bought which will never be filled with any pirated stuff... (media is cd's, dvd's, hdd's, mp3 players, tablets: in short everything that can hold data)

Absolutely. Which is why really local authors are the only people who like that idea - users, many of whom will not pirate anything (especially users who are content creators themselves - amateur photographers, musicians, home video enthusiasts, in other words people who buy and use a lot of blank media), certainly don't necessarily like the idea, and the people who have the most to lose, i.e. foreign content creators, get nothing.

And at the same time, having to pay a levy on blank media, for the express purpose of compensating content creators for pirated stuff, makes it rather more difficult for the users to accept why they shouldn't pirate or download without permission - after all, they're already taxed for it, they're already paying for it whether they do it or not, the state seems to have given a tacit permission (and even expectation) that it will be done, so ... you know, why not just do it?

[HarryT]

Indeed - the current system doesn't seem fair on anyone. It penalises honest people, while offering no incentive for people to act honestly, or recompense for the majority of those whose work is being pirated. It seems to be bad from every perspective.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Absolutely. Which is why really local authors are the only people who like that idea - users, many of whom will not pirate anything (especially users who are content creators themselves)

I'm a content creator with regard to pictures (if I feel like taking pictures), and obviously, as a software engineer. The software I write (embedded software, customized website content management systems and similar platforms) is useless for home use, but it's VERY releant for many businesses. If they'd all pirate that software, the company I work for would go out of business; and therefore, I'd be out of work.

That's why I don't pirate stuff (because, pirating of pictures and software would affect me directly, so I can imagine how it feels), except if there is no other alternative. This happens in two cases:

e-books: If something is available and I am not allowed (or technically unable) to buy it because I happen to live in the wrong spot, then I *will* download it.
music: Sometimes I want to acquire some old 50-60 Jazz/Soul/Blues music, but sometimes the CD's are unobtainable in the Netherlands. If they are ridiculously expensive to import as well, while they cost mere peanuts in the country of origin, I'll be looking for a download.

Fortunately, both don't happen very often.

And at the same time, having to pay a levy on blank media, for the express purpose of compensating content creators for pirated stuff, makes it rather more difficult for the users to accept why they shouldn't pirate or download without permission - after all, they're already taxed for it, they're already paying for it whether they do it or not, the state seems to have given a tacit permission (and even expectation) that it will be done, so ... you know, why not just do it?

Quite right. However, just stating "It is illegal to download copyrighted work" is also not going to work. Often when searching for (background) information on a book or author, or a sample, it happens that Google provides me with a direct link that sometimes turns out to be the full book. Should I happen to click it, mistakenly thinking it's a sample, I'll be downloading an illegal version and might not even know it until I open it. Should I go to jail for that? I don't think so. This is the reason why downloading in the Netherlands is (still) allowed.

[Yapyap]

I do agree that it's not something users should be criminalised for (or even necessarily penalised for) - yes, in many cases, it "should be" clear for the user that they're downloading an unauthorised copy, but in the current online world, things can genuinely get confusing very quickly.

When there's an abundance of genuinely free stuff available (software, music, books, videos, many of which are done to professional standards and, if bought in a box / on physical media from a shop, not free at all), when free legal streaming services exist for some media (music/radio), it's not necessarily at all easy for a lot of people to understand or realise which files are legitimately free to download/stream and which are not.

Frankly, I think the only real, working, solution against piracy is making legally buying things as easy and no-jumping-through-hoops-required as possible. If people have to go to considerably more effort to buy something or if they're simply unable to buy something because it's not sold to them (geo-restrictions), the likelihood for basically honest people to pirate goes way up - after all, no one is losing money if you're not even allowed to buy the thing. (Please note: I'm not saying it's an absolute argument that should be taken as a good reason - but it is a reason that is used, and that is hard to argue; the argument here isn't whether content creators lose income, if they refuse to take some people's money, but whether people are entitled or not entitled to something that other people are entitled to just because they live in another country, and that's a whole other issue.)

If there are (reasonably affordable) easy-to-use, legal alternatives available, most basically honest grown-up people who have some entertainment budget will buy instead, I believe. (I say "grown-up people" as many kids will probably always pirate to some extent, both because of lack of money and because of curiosity, but in my experience, most people start buying more and more as they grow older, their ethics mature and they start earning their own income.)

Those people who will pirate anyway, out of personal convictions ("everything is free") or other similar reasons, they will, well, always pirate. It's the basically honest people (and I believe most consumers are) who can and should be won over by offering reasonable legal alternatives instead of threatening them with jail.

[QuantumIguana]

The first paragraph assumes that all books that are not paid for are illegally obtained. The second paragraph talks about how many books are not paid for, but admits that there are legal free books, and claims that the number of pirated books is not known. If we can know with so much certainty how many books are not paid for, how is that that we don't know how many books are pirated?

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

The first paragraph assumes that all books that are not paid for are illegally obtained. The second paragraph talks about how many books are not paid for, but admits that there are legal free books, and claims that the number of pirated books is not known. If we can know with so much certainty how many books are not paid for, how is that that we don't know how many books are pirated?

You forgot that in the third paragraph it explains that downloading is not illegal in the Netherlands.

[sirmaru]

I just noticed this from 2012 about downloading copyrighted material in the Netherlands:

"Last week the Dutch Supreme Court decided to refer some interesting questions to the European Court of Justice. The responses it receives back could have some serious implications for the tolerant environment currently enjoyed by file-sharers in the Netherlands."

"The Supreme Court now makes the observation that the EU Copyright Directive may consider that copying from an illegal source is self-evidently illegal, so it has referred the matter to the European Court of Justice."

Here is the link:

http://torrentfreak.com/eu-court-ask...ources-120925/

Has the EU Court of Justice ever ruled on it?

If the EU Court of Justice declares the practice illegal, can the Dutch Parliament overrule the EU Court of Justice?

What happens if non-Dutch citizens download from Dutch sites? Would that be legal or illegal? Would one's country of residence have priority in the laws?

Personally, I think NOT paying an author for his copyrighted work is IMMORAL even if legal. There are lots of legal activities which are immoral and folks should not engage in those areas. However, if an author wants to bypass publishers and sell direct to the public through Amazon or his own web site, I see nothing immoral at all.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Indeed - the current system doesn't seem fair on anyone. It penalises honest people, while offering no incentive for people to act honestly, or recompense for the majority of those whose work is being pirated. It seems to be bad from every perspective.

Since it is legal to download the people doing it is honest.