Sideloading: Own content or "from somewhere else"

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.

In my book, piracy (in this context) would mean:
Using illegally obtained content.
You don't have to be the originator. Pirate is not only the first one, who (for example) might have stripped DRM from the original purchase, converted it to try to get rid of personal information in the file header and then spread it around. Pirate, to me, would also be someone who knowingly accepts (or even more so actively looks for) this illegal content. Even if he doesn't spread it around but only keeps it for himself, he still would be a pirate.
Piracy simply being a criminal offense, no matter to what extent.

BTW: Legally, to my knowledge, you don't even have to be aware of having illegal stuff. Not knowing doesn't save you from prosecution. Just having it in your possession is enough for being prosecuted.

From what I've heard, the penalty depends on the number of offenses (extrapolated assumed damage to the copyright owners). So If you participate in a Peer2Peer network, you are receiver and distributor at the same time and are treated more harshly for distributing. But you're an offender all the same. No matter how often you've done it, no matter whether you've been the first in the process or some participant.

Is the owner of pirated stuff a pirate or is there some other term?
Or is in your opinion "pirated stuff" the wrong term for an illegal copy?

[DiapDealer]

Missed movie reference aside: I just find it humorous that in a poll that's clearly about SIDELOADING you keep insisting that you're only interested in the piracy aspect of it. If that's true, then we're all done here: pirates sideload. Yippee skippy.

But the poll itself suggests that there's other things (other than pirate sideloading) that need to be considered. Fine. Only makes sense. But then you keep hamstringing the "not piracy aspect" of the equation to ensure that your initial assumption of "There's More Sideloading of Pirated Content" than "Not Pirated Content" holds true. All the while refusing to accept the possibility that your initial assumption just might not be true (or at least acknowledge that your presented logic might not lend all that much credence to such an assumption).

Instead of a poll, you should have just started a new thread and said; "Hey guys, I think there's more sideloading of pirated content going on then there is sideloading of <ambiguously defined NOT pirated content inserted here>. I won't be convinced otherwise. Goodbye. P.S. download caps hit--piracy is big and junk."

[Xanthe]

Not all of your so-called "piracy" is a criminal offense; that is restricted to specific situations. Most would just fall under the category of copyright infringement, which has been discussed ad finitum in various other threads.

The poll is flawed because it reflects your preconceptions, and though there seem to be many choices, the choices just reflect your particular pigeon-holes, not the reality of the community of users.

Sideloading in and of itself is not an issue; it is merely a shifting of a file from one device to another. If I move a wallpaper .jpg from one device to another, I am sideloading.

You, by equating the action of sideloading with your definition of piracy, are seemingly trying to get people to self-incriminate with this poll. But because the wording of the poll has to be deliberately vague in order not to run afoul of MR's rules, your results are skewed because each person is interpreting the possible poll choices in conjunction with their personal definition of the terminology used, which is not necessarily yours. Your attempts to clarify your meanings are merely increasing the morass.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Missed movie reference aside: I just find it humorous that in a poll that's clearly about SIDELOADING you keep insisting that you're only interested in the piracy aspect of it. If that's true, then we're all done here: pirates sideload. Yippee skippy.

But the poll itself suggests that there's other things (other than pirate sideloading) that need to be considered. Fine. Only makes sense. But then you keep hamstringing the "not piracy aspect" of the equation to ensure that your initial assumption of "There's More Sideloading of Pirated Content" than "Not Pirated Content" holds true. All the while refusing to accept the possibility that your initial assumption just might not be true (or at least acknowledge that your presented logic might not lend all that much credence to such an assumption).

Instead of a poll, you should have just started a new thread and said; "Hey guys, I think there's more sideloading of pirated content going on then there is sideloading of <ambiguously defined NOT pirated content inserted here>. I won't be convinced otherwise. Goodbye. P.S. download caps hit--piracy is big and junk."

I'll try to repeat it a least time and then I'll step out.

The definitions you find in the web aren't consistent.
Is sideloading the mere process of moving your files from one platform to the other? Is it exclusively USB?
Or is it circumventing some system?
Depending on the very definition, pirates entirely sideload or most of the time.
But let's forget about this distinction, it's not important.
Pirates sideload, we all should be able to agree on that.

So:
The ones having obtained their content from illegal sources, be it pirates or copyright infringers or whatever may be the correct term for the individual case, massively use sideloading.
They sideload all kinds of stuff. Stuff where they saved money by not buying it. Stuff which they could have had for free but batch-downloaded from the same source as the first category.
This distinction is not important either. I've never said "Pirates download 100% of the times". If sometimes they download from the darknet and sometimes buy, they would fall in both categories.

All I really would have been interested to see:
Of the content that is sideloaded, X% are from the darknet and (100% - X%) are purchased. How big is X?
X can't be measured in number of books, some mass hoarders would have falsified the results.
X can't be measured in relative figures per user. A pirate probably couldn't see "73% of my stuff is illegal".
X can't be measured in absolute figures per user. The praise with 20.000 books would kill the hones 100 with 100 books each statistically.
So X best can be measured by the general split:
Result could have been:
X% buy exclusively
Y% pirate exclusively
Z% do both

Obviously, one can't get an authentic number in a poll.
MR won't be comparable to the general public.
Still, I would have found it interesting.

Why asking about sideloading?
Why not ask "where do the books come from that you have?"
This would include the TB of files, pirates (or whatever may be the term) have laying around on some NAS. When putting them on the reader, they put some effort into it and it's the best comparison to the avid readers. Content on reader vs. content on reader.

Why focus on "purchasing"?
The main motivation of pirates is saving or making money and/or tricking the system.
If I'd include all legally obtained content I would compare "everything with everything". What if the pirate has 1.000 freebies and only 100 illegal books? I want to understand about the 100 illegal ones. Illegal by having avoided the buying price. And compared those 100 to the bought 100 ones of another user. And not the 100 bought ones and 1.000 freebies an honest user may have.

Why not a separate point for freebies?
To what to compare? Let's just say, the reality would be:

Honest user:
100 purchased books
80 freebies

Pirate:
300 illegal downloads
50 freebies

I want to compare the 100 to this 300.
Not 180 to 350.
Not 80 to 50.

I don't want to "incriminate" anyone.
I really don't care about the names. They have been open by accident, no experience with polls on MR. They can be hidden by a moderator, I don't mind.

Again:
I don't see, how else the comparison purchased vs. pirated could be done.
Without sideloading, it would include all the mass downloads that never will be used or even being counted precisely. And it would be a massive overweight for the pirates.
Like I wrote before: There's no point about "number of books" in the poll. Someone can be exclusively pirating, exclusively buying or a mixture of it. And you can find a tick in the box for all 3 scenarios.
So it really only leaves the users out, that have 100% freebies, never "bought".
I didn't have them in the equation, because I have the avoided-buying-stuff on the other side of the equation.

[rixte]

Well, I'll just say - for the purpose of polling, if you find inconsistent definitions of words, you make sure to define the words when creating the poll. (For the purposes of this poll, sideloading means: xyz. For the purpose of this poll, purchased content includes all legally obtained content, regardless of price paid. That one is still super wacky to me, since to me a library ebook or a review copy from BookRooster isn't purchased but !)

And you do that for each word that has multiple interpretations. Otherwise it's all garbage in, garbage out.

[mgmueller]

I try to summarize, what has been criticized about the poll.

But before that: Yes, it was a flawed poll and yes, it's a stupid and not really relevant matter. It was supposed to be a quick snapshot for my personal interest, not a "cover it all" study.

Issue #1:
I've left out the downloaders of freebies.
Are there really people out there, who have 100% freebies, PD and such? Legally obtained, but never paid a single cent for a single book?
It would surprise me, if avid readers never would have paid for a book.
The option to tick says "I buy" not "I buy all the time" or "I buy 100% of my stuff".
If you buy 10% of your stuff and 90% is for free, you still fall into this category.
Only the ones, really having 100% free stuff, would fall out of the equation.
One still could consider them in the "buying" group, but this special group really wasn't in my focus. Like I wrote: If I compare to pirates (or whatever the correct term), it's about the comparison "I pay, he doesn't".

Issue #2:
Some ticked the box for "somewhere else" without getting my drift this being a synonym for pirated stuff.
When starting the poll, I thought it would be unambiguous enough. First point says "pay", second one puts "somewhere else" in quotation marks. And the headline says "your own" and again compares to "somewhere else". I still think it's relatively clear, but it's not unambiguous.
Some who put the tick in the box for meaning "free stuff" now are pissed because it could be interpreted as them favoring piracy.
I partially get that point and I already repeatedly confirmed the ambiguity. But I only partially get the aggression and the fuss. The people who know you, know your standpoint. And why would someone care about the others? Again: It's a poll in a user forum, not an assessment center.

Issue #3:
The entire poll doesn't make sense, only limiting to sideloading and leaving lots of stuff out.
Every poll is a simplification.
I was and am focusing on a single topic: Bought stuff vs. shadily obtained one.
And as the bought one normally is loaded onto the reader, I should use the same reference for the shady one. Agreed, I just could have asked "what's on your reader" instead of "what do you sideload". But then again, I found the link to sideloading interesting, because it seems to be of such importance for many.

Anyway...
I've already asked Alex Turcic to take down this poll.
Way to time consuming and nothing to gain for anyone of us.

[Hampshire Nanny]

Originally Posted by mgmueller

Anyway...
I've already asked Alex Turcic to take down this poll.
Way to time consuming and nothing to gain for anyone of us.

Well, I thought the discussion was actually very productive.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by rixte

Well, I'll just say - for the purpose of polling, if you find inconsistent definitions of words, you make sure to define the words when creating the poll. (For the purposes of this poll, sideloading means: xyz. For the purpose of this poll, purchased content includes all legally obtained content, regardless of price paid. That one is still super wacky to me, since to me a library ebook or a review copy from BookRooster isn't purchased but !)

And you do that for each word that has multiple interpretations. Otherwise it's all garbage in, garbage out.

I don't think, the definition of "sideloading" really is relevant for the point I was after at.
The discussion only came up, because someone stated "pirates sideload 100%".
For one, even pirates might purchase from time to time, so they would fall into both categories.
But more importantly, based on some definitions it wouldn't be 100% inevitably.
Else it doesn't matter.
Everyone voting in the poll can decide on his own: Cloud, NAS, USB...
Important criteria only would be: Not directly from the respective store downloaded to the reader. Because that's an option the pirate normally doesn't have (maybe some hack the stores, I don't know, but normally it won't be an option). Meaning: Touching the files in some way. This can be done by both, pirates and buyers, and so allows for a direct comparison.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by Hampshire Nanny

Well, I thought the discussion was actually very productive.

I don't know, whether it actually can be taken down.
I'd prefer so, else I'd react all the time and spend way more time and energy, than I wanted to do.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by Xanthe

...Sideloading in and of itself is not an issue; it is merely a shifting of a file from one device to another. If I move a wallpaper .jpg from one device to another, I am sideloading...

My point being: Sideloading is the main (or depending on the definition, the only) option for a pirate (or whatever the term) to get his content onto the reader. So, for a 1:1 comparison, I have to use the very same methodology for the purchaser of books. Not the downloads from the store, as for comparison the pirate normally doesn't have this option. But not the mass downloads of pirates on some NAS either, but only the stuff loaded on the reader.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

..."There's More Sideloading of Pirated Content" than "Not Pirated Content"...

Where did I state that?

I have no idea about the ratio.

If we'd take number of books as the criteria, pirates (or whatever the term) probably would account for a lot. My 10 friends alone with their 150.000+ books probably equaling 1.000 honest buyers or so.

If we'd take the ratio "legal books on readers" vs. "illegally obtained ones on readers" it certainly would be a more favorable (as in honest) ratio. The pirates probably simply not bringing their tens of thousands of books onto the readers.
So that's already an argument for my including "sideloading" into the equation.

If we'd take number of pirates vs. number of buyers, it's starting to get interesting. My guess would, a huge portion of readers fall into both categories. For example, in 2008 on my beloved iRex iLiad, I did have PDFs of 2 books from Umberto Eco. They hadn't been available as eBooks and it took me a while to get hold of PDFs. Some argue, it's not piracy (or whatever the term) as it couldn't be bought and so I didn't harm any purchase. I did consider it piracy back then and do so now, because I simply didn't pay for the books. In the meantime I have bought them. Even 3 or 4 times, in numerous formats. So I don't feel guilty about it and I still would count myself solely in the buying category. My ratio of bought vs. pirated is some 3.000+ to maybe 200. But that's history. I don't have a single not-purchased book on any reader. (At least on the active ones. I'd have to check the 7+year old ones in my desk drawers).

Many of you seem to think I have some kind of agenda:
a.) What agenda should this be? I can't gain anything of either result of the poll.
b.) I never did point fingers or blame anyone of piracy. I simply say, it's a huge issue and personally I'd be interested to know, how big it is. If you Google for a movie or a book, you instantly get dozens of hits. How save those websites are re. spams, viruses or being caught, I don't know. But it's all free floating in the web, that much is sure.

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I certainly agree that piracy is a real problem, and that there are undoubtedly people who do as you suggest. I'm not sure, though, that one could necessarily equate high downloads volumes with piracy - there could well be other causes for it, as we've already discussed.

I do think that 100GB/day is a huge, huge amount of data. My internet traffic is about 30GB a month, and that includes watching a fair number of programmes using video streaming (BBC iPlayer).

Just out of curiosity:
I've just checked online and found "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" as a 50GB (!!!) download. Took me 20 seconds to find it.
A few other versions around 10GB.
How big would a family have to be and what kind of streaming services would they need, to get to that volume?
And even professional photographers and the likes have to do a lot of work, to get to that.
If such a movie is online, I gather there has to be a market and a group of downloaders.
Yes, there's no proof about any relation between movies and books.
But if it's such a huge market for movies (and it has to be, looking at the number of lawyers active and such) that are worth about € 5 to € 15 (for the 20 or so countries where I know the prices), why shouldn't there be enormous demand for books that are in a similar price range.

JFYI:
My friend in Munich is working in a well known (lots of media attention) lawyer's association. They generate a revenue of more than € 10 million per year in Germany for a single TV studio alone. On average, the compromise for "declaration to cease and desist" is in the range of € 300 (per case). So this means, this small company, 1 of 3 in Munich alone, for only a single TV studio "catches" more than 30.000 pirates (or whatever the term).
(Some pirates have to pay for more than 1 case, so it's a bit less).
Again: 30.000 illegal movie downloaders. Only in Germany. A single company of lawyers, in Munich alone there are 3 of those.
How many such € 300 payments are there then in Germany per year? A few hundred thousands? This easily might be a few percent of all households...And that's the ones they catch...

[Xanthe]

Originally Posted by mgmueller

Some who put the tick in the box for meaning "free stuff" now are pissed because it could be interpreted as them favoring piracy.
I partially get that point and I already repeatedly confirmed the ambiguity. But I only partially get the aggression and the fuss. The people who know you, know your standpoint. And why would someone care about the others? Again: It's a poll in a user forum, not an assessment center.

Do not take this in the wrong way, but I think that is very naive.

There are over 230,000 members of the MobileRead forums. We all don't know each other or our POV's.

Do you think that the only people who read this forum are the ones who regularly post here?

People would rightly be pissed if someone looks at the responses to the poll, reads the names of who answered what question, and draws incorrect conclusions about the activities of that member. In this current climate, no one wants to be the recipient of a "cease and desist" letter from a law firm because of an innocent response to a poll.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by gweeks

While morally suspect, it's not piracy if the books are public domain. If the books are public domain you don't get to impose additional restrictions on them for other uses.

Greg

Originally Posted by HarryT

Absolutely. It's despicable, but not illegal.

It is more than despicable, it is illegal since the books in question were more than just TXT files. They had the copyrighted work of the person who uploaded them -- the unique, handcrafted CSS design and HTML tagging which gave it its look, as well as possibly images which may have been derived from the public domain, but may have been created by the uploader.

Merely using those books as a source for the text is not a problem, but that would have little point, since you can already get them from so many places.

To clarify: the thief in question pirated uploaders' hard work. Formatting is legally copyrightable. (I believe the books in question were doubleshuffle's in case he remembers where the original thread was. I don't.)

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by mgmueller

Not really.
I don't expect to "get anything out of it". Neither of a poll, nor a thread. In some rare occasions maybe a buying recommendation or help in solving a problem. But normally it's just spending a few minutes while hanging in a conference call. It doesn't have to be a "life changing" experience.
And in my book, that's the very nature of a hobby. Not being about any kind of productivity, but (often enough aimlessly) spend your spare time.

Why do you persist in assuming that any time someone get something out of something, it must be life-changing?

So for the sake of context, I will repost the post you quoted:

Originally Posted by eschwartz

You may not have a legal or political agenda, but you certainly seem to desire to vindicate your opinions in your own mind.

self-vindication-of-opinions is a valid agenda in my book.

Let me rephrase that.

That being the use of the conclusions you wished to make. (I assume you must've had some idea of what you were going to get out of this poll, other than finger exercise?)

Note that you only quoted the last section:

Originally Posted by eschwartz

..I assume you must've had some idea of what you were going to get out of this poll, other than finger exercise?)

I believe the critical section would be:

self-vindication-of-opinions is a valid agenda in my book.

You are more than welcome to misquote me and ignore my points as much as you wish, of course.