Ethics and legalities of format shifting

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

So, all these accusations of theft, embezzlement and all the other crap is not your fault? It is because Google Translate doesn't work very well?

Sorry, but that is a load of BS. And it does not excuse you in any culpability. One or two posts, maybe. But, you have made far to many post arguing in this thread to really believe this claim, or to be able to make the claim that the language used is not your responsibility.

It is certainly not my responsibility if someone feels affected by my general statements.
I am not aware that I would have accused anyone directly by name - but have answered posts that advocate breaking the law.
And if a German "Du" in the meaning of "man" is translated by Google as a personal address, then this problem does not affect me either.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

What I am also curious about is why you use Calibre Companion.

This question is very easy to answer:
Calibre Companion gives me excellent management of my rather extensive library and opens the application corresponding to the file extension - e.g. the Pocketbook app for Adobe DRM epub

I mean, it is a tool to allow you to copy ebooks from other machines, principally a machine running calibre, to a central location on an Android device.

This thought is also incorrect.
It is true that in Calibre Componion you can set the folder into which certain file types should be copied.
Amazon books are somewhere else than fb2 or epub, for example

So, as you seem to be claiming you don't use a computer for you ebooks, I don't see much use in it.

I have never claimed such nonsense.
My statement was that it is not necessary and that it makes a big difference.

Plus, as apparently you only by books with DRM, I'm absolutely stunned that Calibre Companion will work with them. I mean, how does Calibre Companion give a reading app a book that has Adobe DRM in it?

You draw conclusions regarding the use of applications that prove you have no idea (about them).

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

I think it's funny the energy with which a violation of the law is defended here

The thread is about the "Ethics and legalities of format shifting".

Most of us are talking about the former, while you are talking solely about the latter, which is why the conversation is not achieving anything.

Yes, where I live format shifting is not legal. I do not think it is unethical.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

The thread is about the "Ethics and legalities of format shifting".

Most of us are talking about the former, while you are talking solely about the latter, which is why the conversation is not achieving anything.

Yes, where I live format shifting is not legal. I do not think it is unethical.

Well I do.

If it is done to read on a device/app other than the one connected to the account (health reasons are probably excluded from this) - because this avoids the legal right to the license payment.

In my community, avoiding proper payment is called theft / misappropriation.

And that's not ethical behavior.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

It is certainly not my responsibility if someone feels affected by my general statements.

My first response to that it you need to take responsibility for your words. Your words are insulting. And many could be expressed in none insulting ways. Or not at all. There is no way that the bit I quoted above was not deliberate and it is insulting to anyone who has chosen to use Kobo and Kindle devices.

And yes, I will take responsibility for anything I say here or elsewhere. Here, I have the luxury of time that I can type something out and rewrite it to express myself better. And if something slips through, I will apologise. Though occasionally, I have asked for an explanation of the problem. Or a suggestion for how to word it better in the future.

My second response is that you are not always making general statements.

I am not aware that I would have accused anyone directly by name - but have answered posts that advocate breaking the law.

No, you have not accused anyone by name. But, you have expressed your opinion in ways that it is obvious who you are talking to. And your attitude is clear.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

This question is very easy to answer:
Calibre Companion gives me excellent management of my rather extensive library and opens the application corresponding to the file extension - e.g. the Pocketbook app for Adobe DRM epubThis thought is also incorrect.
It is true that in Calibre Componion you can set the folder into which certain file types should be copied.
Amazon books are somewhere else than fb2 or epub, for exampleI have never claimed such nonsense.
My statement was that it is not necessary and that it makes a big difference.You draw conclusions regarding the use of applications that prove you have no idea (about them).

Yes, you are correct that I do not use Calibre Companion. But, I use enough other ereading related applications, that the idea of opening an epub with Adobe DRM in an application that didn't download it, or where ADE was not used to add the book, did not seem likely. But, I stand corrected.

As to my statement of you not using a computer for ebook related actions, it was reasonable. You have consistently in this thread pointed out that you only have your ebooks on the device that they are authorised for. And you have consistently shutdown, and basically ridiculed, anyone who said they used a computer for something ebook related. So, why on earth would we think you were putting your DRM protected books a PC where you may not be allowed to read them.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

If it is done to read on a device/app other than the one connected to the account (health reasons are probably excluded from this) - because this avoids the legal right to the license payment.

You are confusing legality and ethicality again. Your argument is basically that it is illegal, therefore it is unethical.

I have paid for a license to read the book, I read the book. I do not give copies to anyone else, or do anything else with it. I do not consider that unethical.

You might, because ethics are subjective, whereas legality is objective.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Something like this has never happened to me in my really long years of experience.
Of course I don't know what you're up to.Well, through a criminal breach of the law

I used to buy MS Reader (LIT) format eBooks. If I wasn't able to remove the DRM, I would have lost access to all of those eBooks that I paid good money for. Microsoft closed the DRM servers.

Would you like to lose access to eBooks you paid for because of the DRM?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

It is very easy to prove to the truth that anyone who removes DRM to read a file on an unauthorized device is suppressing payment for an additional license required.
And embezzlement is a criminal act.

Thus "defamation" is not applicable.

What would you say I am doing if I remove the DRM to read the eBook on an authorized device? I do remove the DRM from ePub that I purchase and I read these ePub on my Kobo Aura H2O which is my authorized device.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by MarjaE

Is it different if I'm stripping DRM to read using different software on an authorized device?

e.g. I buy a reference book from Amazon, I want to search it on my Mac, but blinking cursors give me migraines, so I can't search in the Kindle for Mac app.

The exemptions say you are allowed to remove the DRM and modify the eBook because of the disability.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

... you have not accused anyone by name. But, you have expressed your opinion in ways that it is obvious who you are talking to. And your attitude is clear.

Of course, if someone gives me to understand that they are not willing to pay something that is legally due, then I can also express my opinion that I see such a procedure as a theft / embezzlement.

If someone feels affected because they are really doing it, then that really isn't my problem.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

What would you say I am doing if I remove the DRM to read the eBook on an authorized device? I do remove the DRM from ePub that I purchase and I read these ePub on my Kobo Aura H2O which is my authorized device.

I don't understand the point of this action, because DRM is also self-protection - nobody except me can do anything with this file.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Of course, if someone gives me to understand that they are not willing to pay something that is legally due, then I can also express my opinion that I see such a procedure as a theft / embezzlement.

If someone feels affected because they are really doing it, then that really isn't my problem.

Yes it is. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. You are responsible for everything you say. We all are responsible for our actions and what we say. You are deliberately using emotive terms rather than just discuss the issue. You are deliberately repeating the accusation to upset people. There is no other reason to do that.

And yet again, you completely ignore the example of you behaviour that I have explicitly pointed out as being offensive. And at least one other person in this thread also pointed out. The fact that you are so carefully ignoring it demonstrates to me how deliberate you are in your statements.

And again, the baffling mention of "embezzlement". Nothing discussed in this thread is in anyway remotely embezzlement.

And for the record, I do strip DRM from the books I buy. But, there is no way that how I handle my purchased books is causing any loss of income to anyone. I could read them without removing the DRM, and do that for many books. But, I also fix badly formatted books to make it easier for me to read. If I did not do this, there would be loss of income to someone as I would be returning the book. While this is probably against the terms of use of at least one of the stores I use, but, I do not consider it to be against the spirit of the agreements or that it is immoral unethical. And from what I have seen from authors, they are as frustrated by these conditions as we are. And are definitely not expecting anyone to buy multiple copies to read in different places. Most would probably think that people who did were pretty stupid.

[pazos]

Zu DRM: es gibt keine für mich ordentlich verwendbare Lese App, die mit DRM umgehen kann - das ist der einzige Grund, weshalb ich es enferne; ich gebe an niemanden auch nur irgendein Buch weiter

Fragen und Diskussionen zu: Endgültiges Abschalten der früheren Onleihe-App zum 30.04.2017

So, yeah. Still fair use. Some of us are still doing that: stripping DRM in our own purchased books to use them in the software we want.

You seem to imply that you were doing that on lended books too. That's a shame if true and I can understand why most people here, me included, are against such usercases.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by pazos

Fragen und Diskussionen zu: Endgültiges Abschalten der früheren Onleihe-App zum 30.04.2017

So, yeah. Still fair use. Some of us are still doing that: stripping DRM in our own purchased books to use them in the software we want.

You seem to imply that you were doing that on lended books too. That's a shame if true and I can understand why most people here, me included, are against such usercases.

Yes and?
You can write a lot, especially if you are annoyed about an update that suddenly made it impossible to proceed legally and correctly.