eBook piracy, how common is it?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

I must say i'm very much annoyed by your disingenuousness here.

I am not being disingenuous.

When you brought this up earlier, Moejoe said this in response to your suggestion that authors got a "substantial" part of their income from these library lending payments

The maximum payout under the PLR is £6,600 per annum. A fair number of authors receive this maximum, and a lot more get £1000+. That is a not insubstantial sum of money, IMHO.

[Stitchawl]

I'd like to raise the point that there is so much media available today, pirated in Third World Countries, that people in First World countries purchase unknowingly.

Right now, Cambodia produces the market share of pirated paper books, looking for all the world like legitimate productions. A friend of mine (a book retailer in Thailand) showed me how to tell the difference, and I've since seen these same types of works being sold in major US retail chains! It's like trying to discover counterfeit currency. You have to know what to look for or you simply can't tell the difference.

How many DVD's are sold each day in major US, Canadian, Australian, European, etc., cities that are made illegally in Third World countries? There are large signs that I've seen in major international airports stating that illegal DVD's will be confiscated, as well as pirated designer lable goods such as Louis Vuiton, but as yet, no one is stopping pirated books and the market is flooded with them.

Are you sure that the music your kids are paying for is legit? They might well be paying but is the retailer supplying the genuine article. Or, as in the case of the book retailers who aren't even aware they are selling fakes, are the music sellers peddling pirated music? Are the retailers peddling pirated e-books? How would you know if they were or weren't? As I said before, I've seen pirated paper books in one of America's largest chain book stores. The clerks had no clue. If the "reliable" and "trustworthy" stores are selling fakes without even knowing it, how is one to know what you are purchasing over the internet as a download? After all, we do know that when profit is involved, especially big profit, DRM means very little...

Stitchawl

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But the fundamental point is that it is YOUR RIGHT, as the author, to decide that you wish to charge $10,000 for your work, just as it is the right of the consumer to decide whether or not it's worth that amount to them. The consumer does NOT have the right, either legally or morally, to say "it's not worth that much to me, so I'm just going to take it without paying for it".

Harry, I am not arguing morals here, or legality. While I do agree with your statement as an abstract principle, I also agree that there should be world peace, and no death and suffering.

But in the real world, there is a price point, at which the majority of interested users will pay for an item.

If you have rampant piracy, there is a good chance, that the asking price is too high, or that the supply does not reflect the demand.

I personally think, Amazon is moving in the right direction: I just purchased The Golden Compass ebook, even though I had bought the hard-covers of the trilogy to read last Fall. So, last night I was thinking I should finally read it, but wanted to do it on e-ink, so I idly looked on Amazon, and it was there, for just over $7. So I bought it (will strip the DRM tomorrow.)

I know full-well that it is available in e-format "for free," and as I said, I have the hard covers. But, $7 was the right price for me. If it was not legally available, or if the price was, say $50, I might have found a different way....

Again, find the right price, and there will be a lot fewer scull & bones, regardless of DRM, or draconian laws.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by HarryT

...The consumer does NOT have the right, either legally or morally, to say "it's not worth that much to me, so I'm just going to take it without paying for it".

I don't see how the consumer can say "it's not worth that much to me", since it is impossible for them to know what it's worth until they've consumed it.

[fugazied]

I buy the vast majority. The ones I don't are usually technical manuals, I either get them in paper copies or find them online.

They are generally over-priced, which probably explains it. I'm a student so buying very expensive technical books basically send me broke.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

I don't see how the consumer can say "it's not worth that much to me", since it is impossible for them to know what it's worth until they've consumed it.

I think it's perfectly posible to have an idea of how much you want a thing beforehand - I ususally do. How much you want it, combined with how much you are able to pay, will decide if you buy it or not. After you've consumed you might then decide it wasn't worth it anyway, but that was the risk you took.
(It doesn't necessarily follow that it is then okay to infringe copyrights to get it anyway).

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Ea

I think it's perfectly posible to have an idea of how much you want a thing beforehand - I ususally do. How much you want it, combined with how much you are able to pay, will decide if you buy it or not. After you've consumed you might then decide it wasn't worth it anyway, but that was the risk you took.

So the concept of 'worth' would seem to be irrelevant to the discussion - since it can only be applied retroactively.

[Good Old Neon]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Again, find the right price, and there will be a lot fewer scull & bones, regardless of DRM, or draconian laws.

Perhaps DRM schemes and other similar measures publishers and labels resort to wouldn’t be so damn draconian if people did not steal their copyrighted materials? The fact is, protections exist precisely because people feel as though they can simply take what they do not own, have not paid for - security measures exist as a direct result of piracy.

I place less blame on the publishers and labels, and more on the end “I’ll take whatever I damn well please” user.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

So the concept of 'worth' would seem to be irrelevant to the discussion - since it can only be applied retroactively.

No... The worth would be in the 'want'. I want it very much, then it would be worth more to me than if I wanted it less. I would pay more for it, provided I had the means. I don't understand why you can infer from what I said that it can only be applied retroactively?

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Ea

No... The worth would be in the 'want'. I want it very much, then it would be worth more to me than if I wanted it less. I would pay more for it, provided I had the means. I don't understand why you can infer from what I said that it can only be applied retroactively?

You don't know if your want (e.g. an entertaining read) will be satisfied till after you've purchased something purporting to satisfy it.

[Good Old Neon]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

You don't know if your want (e.g. an entertaining read) will be satisfied till after you've purchased something purporting to satisfy it.

Welcome to life - you also don’t get to decided whether or not you enjoyed a pizza well enough to pay for after it's already in gastro.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Good Old Neon

Welcome to life - you also don’t get to decided whether or not you enjoyed a pizza well enough to pay for after it's already in gastro.

But you do get to refuse payment if the meal was unsatisfactory.

[Good Old Neon]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

But you do get to refuse payment if the meal was unsatisfactory.

Not necessarily - that decision is usually made by the restaurant owner. You can send something back after a bite or two, but good luck getting a refund after you’ve already cleaned your plate.

Caveat emptor.

[ficbot]

Originally Posted by Andurian

Authors can't exactly go on reading tours to make money...

Sure they can, and many do. It's called a 'book tour.'

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Good Old Neon

Not necessarily - that decision is usually made by the restaurant owner. You can send something back after a bite or two, but good luck getting a refund after you’ve already cleaned your plate.

The standard is still set. The customer has the right not to provide payment if he finds the service not up to par, or for a number of reasons, even after the completion of a meal. It happened all the time in a restaurant I used to work at. We had one chap who wouldn't pay because the wine he had with his meal was unsatisfactory. Another because he said the waiter was 'discourteous'. This was a Hotel, quite a swanky one, not Pizza Hut or anything like that.