Open Source culture to blame for e-book piracy! - Page 21

Krystian Galaj · 01-09-2010, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

There is no need to "prove" it. It's obvious. We do not have a world or system in place to provide for all the citizens need (food, shelter, clothing). The ability to profit from one's creations is required in a capitalistic society.

You answered the wrong question, not the one I asked. Reading comprehension problems?

To reiterate, I believe the ability to profit from one's creations, for all authors but the biggest stars, is increased as a result of unauthorized copying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

So if I take your car and then prove that your health has improved (you walk more or ride a bike) and you have more money (no gas, no taxes, etc.) that means you believe I should go free and keep the car?

Could you explain, what does this have to do with my question? If 'take your car' was supposed to be analogy, you completely missed the point.

random50 · 01-09-2010, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

There is no need to "prove" it. It's obvious.

You quote the very first line of his post. Did you read the rest of it?

It's one of those things that appears obvious until you think about it more carefully.

kennyc · 01-09-2010, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by random50

You quote the very first line of his post. Did you read the rest of it?

It's one of those things that appears obvious until you think about it more carefully.

I've likely been thinking about this since before you were born.

random50 · 01-09-2010, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

I've likely been thinking about this since before you were born.

Then you show a very poor return for the effort.

Krystian Galaj · 01-09-2010, 01:57 PM

Well, at least I put together a summary for some.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (disputed, but no other clear source in this form)

kennyc · 01-09-2010, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by random50

Then you show a very poor return for the effort.

What do you read your stolen books on, your device says none?

Krystian Galaj · 01-09-2010, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

What do you read your stolen books on, your device says none?

1. There are reading programs available on PCs, and Macs.
2. For the book to be stolen, it needs to be a paper one, so no devices are neccessary.
3 Where do you get the information about random50 reading stolen books? Or are you just trolling?

random50 · 01-09-2010, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

What do you read your stolen books on, your device says none?

Ah, another example of simplistic logic leading to inaccurate conclusions.

I own a v1 Kindle.

@kyrstian, I appreciated your post, at least. Not arguments I haven't seen before, but well collated.

Dumas · 01-09-2010, 02:52 PM

I think I now have a pretty good understanding of your position now. However, two points.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You are putting words in my mouth.

This was certainly not my intent. Where exactly did I do so in order that I may clarify, correct, and or retract?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

That is understandable and noble. But authors have to eat, too. They have bills to pay. Of course, if an author feels he is rich enough and wants to give everything away for free, fine.

I will repeat my original question (with some clarification):

If it makes sense for an author to give away their early works for "free" (as you suggest), then why doesn't it make sense for them to give away all their works in digital form (not "everything" as you subsequently suggested) for "free" as some authors already do?

Patricia · 01-09-2010, 03:06 PM

Please cool down people, and read the section on not launching personal attacks on other members in our posting guidelines.

(Just click on "Guidelines" on the blue bar at the bottom of every forum page.)

Every single discussion on piracy, shring or DRM seems to get very heated at some point. But we can still be polite when disagreeing, if we try.

schex86 · 01-09-2010, 05:44 PM

Came across an interesting concept today, from late economist Joseph Schumpeter, that I believe is relevant to the discussion:

"Capitalism…is by nature a form or method of economic change and not only never is but never can be stationary…. The fundamental impulse that sets and keeps the capitalist engine in motion comes from the new consumers, goods, the new methods of production or transportation, the new markets, the new forms of industrial organization that enterprise creates… [T]he history of the productive apparatus of a typical farm, from the beginnings of the rationalization of crop rotation, plowing and fattening to the mechanized thing of today—linking up with elevators and railroads—is a history of evolutions. So is the history of the productive apparatus of the iron and steel industry from the charcoal furnace to our own type of furnace, of the history of the apparatus of power production from the overshot water wheel to the modern power plant, or the history of transportation from the mail coach to the airplane. The opening up of new markets, foreign or domestic, and the organizational development from the craft shop and the factory to such concerns as U.S. Steel illustrate the same process of industrial mutation…that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism. It is what capitalism consists in and what every capitalist concern has got to live in…."

IMO, the commonly perceived insanity of lifelong +70 year copyrights among others is a product of our misguided government, under the influence of special interest, interfering in the free market, attempting to "save" industries such as publishing, which should have been revolutionized long ago, but somehow still exist in a shadow of their former glory today, desperately enforcing the artificial scarcity so necessary for their antiquated business model, to the great detriment of everyone else.

schex86 · 01-09-2010, 06:56 PM

And to clarify my original point regarding libraries, I believe my comparison was sound. For those who have not had the benefit of reading Ben Franklin's autobiography, his conception of public libraries was formed due to his inability to acquire books which he wanted to read, which was a great inconvenience to him.

To rectify this situation, he got together with his book-loving friends, and they combined their resources, pooling all their books in a central location, and allowing all the members to borrow whichever of the pooled books they so desired.

Thus the natural scarcity of useful information was defeated and everyone benefited. To repeat myself, this communal benefit, which was so obvious to Franklin and his fellow "book club" members, was the driving force behind Franklin's effort to instutionalize this behavior in the form of Philadelphia's first library.

Take that same principle, and apply modern information technology to it. The inevitable result is "file sharing". And while libraries, due to their early adoption in the American colonies are, and will forever continue to be, legal, filesharing has unfortunately been relegated to a sort of limbo because it threatens the existing structure of book production.

Yet in its very essence, the act of borrowing a book from a library, or a mutual book-lovin' friend, is the same as sharing a file. It is not theft. Or at least Ben Franklin didn't think so, and some might say he was a highly moral man.

This was, and still is, my point.

hidari · 01-09-2010, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

For music piracy is less of a problem, since a lot of money can be made on concerts. Ticket prices have gone through the roof, artists get plenty from TV deals, etc. But which author can make good money on a lecture and book signing tour, or do commercials and shows?

No they cannot. But, if they aren't good enough to make a living on their writing then they should find another job.

netseeker · 01-09-2010, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hidari

No they cannot. But, if they aren't good enough to make a living on their writing then they should find another job.

The vast majority of authors have another regular occupation because they can't make a living on their writing. It's not primarily a question of being a "good" or "bad" author. (otherwise Dan Brown couldn't be an author for example

)

DawnFalcon · 01-09-2010, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

What happens if your readers get a virus? Are you liable, since you received money?

Easy fix - upload it there yourself with an advert "if you liked this, tip me at..."

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
TomeRaider to go open source	MatYadabyte	News	27	11-18-2012 12:23 PM
Open source	bradrice	Kindle Formats	2	12-21-2009 09:30 AM
Has open source helped or hindered the e-book industry?	kjk	News	31	12-15-2009 08:53 PM
iRex and Open Source	jrial	iRex	8	03-03-2009 10:34 AM
Bookworm Gives a Boost to Open-Source ePub E-Book Format	Kris777	News	7	02-18-2009 09:16 PM

01-09-2010, 01:57 PM	#305
Krystian Galaj Guru Posts: 820 Karma: 11012 Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Warsaw, Poland Device: Bookeen Cybook	Well, at least I put together a summary for some. "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (disputed, but no other clear source in this form)

01-09-2010, 03:06 PM	#310
Patricia Reader Posts: 11,504 Karma: 8720163 Join Date: May 2007 Location: South Wales, UK Device: Sony PRS-500, PRS-505, Asus EEEpc 4G	Please cool down people, and read the section on not launching personal attacks on other members in our posting guidelines. (Just click on "Guidelines" on the blue bar at the bottom of every forum page.) Every single discussion on piracy, shring or DRM seems to get very heated at some point. But we can still be polite when disagreeing, if we try.

01-09-2010, 05:44 PM	#311
schex86 Enthusiast Posts: 48 Karma: 766 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Alaska Device: Kindle 2, Blackberry Mobipocket Reader	Came across an interesting concept today, from late economist Joseph Schumpeter, that I believe is relevant to the discussion: "Capitalism…is by nature a form or method of economic change and not only never is but never can be stationary…. The fundamental impulse that sets and keeps the capitalist engine in motion comes from the new consumers, goods, the new methods of production or transportation, the new markets, the new forms of industrial organization that enterprise creates… [T]he history of the productive apparatus of a typical farm, from the beginnings of the rationalization of crop rotation, plowing and fattening to the mechanized thing of today—linking up with elevators and railroads—is a history of evolutions. So is the history of the productive apparatus of the iron and steel industry from the charcoal furnace to our own type of furnace, of the history of the apparatus of power production from the overshot water wheel to the modern power plant, or the history of transportation from the mail coach to the airplane. The opening up of new markets, foreign or domestic, and the organizational development from the craft shop and the factory to such concerns as U.S. Steel illustrate the same process of industrial mutation…that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism. It is what capitalism consists in and what every capitalist concern has got to live in…." IMO, the commonly perceived insanity of lifelong +70 year copyrights among others is a product of our misguided government, under the influence of special interest, interfering in the free market, attempting to "save" industries such as publishing, which should have been revolutionized long ago, but somehow still exist in a shadow of their former glory today, desperately enforcing the artificial scarcity so necessary for their antiquated business model, to the great detriment of everyone else.

01-09-2010, 06:56 PM	#312
schex86 Enthusiast Posts: 48 Karma: 766 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Alaska Device: Kindle 2, Blackberry Mobipocket Reader	And to clarify my original point regarding libraries, I believe my comparison was sound. For those who have not had the benefit of reading Ben Franklin's autobiography, his conception of public libraries was formed due to his inability to acquire books which he wanted to read, which was a great inconvenience to him. To rectify this situation, he got together with his book-loving friends, and they combined their resources, pooling all their books in a central location, and allowing all the members to borrow whichever of the pooled books they so desired. Thus the natural scarcity of useful information was defeated and everyone benefited. To repeat myself, this communal benefit, which was so obvious to Franklin and his fellow "book club" members, was the driving force behind Franklin's effort to instutionalize this behavior in the form of Philadelphia's first library. Take that same principle, and apply modern information technology to it. The inevitable result is "file sharing". And while libraries, due to their early adoption in the American colonies are, and will forever continue to be, legal, filesharing has unfortunately been relegated to a sort of limbo because it threatens the existing structure of book production. Yet in its very essence, the act of borrowing a book from a library, or a mutual book-lovin' friend, is the same as sharing a file. It is not theft. Or at least Ben Franklin didn't think so, and some might say he was a highly moral man. This was, and still is, my point.