Can I sell my K3 with my ill gotten books?

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by lebleaux

A question, no agenda, just curious. If I own a book (as in I purchased it from a bookstore) and now I wish to have that book available to read on my Kindle what should I do. I could buy it again, I could probably download a torrent and get it that way or I could scan it, I guess. I would sooner buy than scan but am more likely to go the torrent route. Am I breaking any rules (legal or moral) in doing this. Similarly, once I have it in an electronic form, am I breaking any covenants if I give it to a friend to read - which I often do with a book. If I am not breaking any covenants then what is to stop me making electronic copies of all the books I own available to anyone via the internet.

a grey slippery slope. I have been reading a certain fantasy series over the past 20 years. the author of this series died (I know many of you know who I am talking about) as it is, as a family we have purchased numerous copies over the years as some of them have actually been worn out. 4 people reading the books, then re-reading them prior to the next book coming out will do that! eventually a replacement writer was found to complete the series which they issued in e-book format. but! they said they would release the rest of the series one a month. that wasn't fast enough for me, and many others I am sure. I went down the dark path of questionable acquisition...

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by karthwyne

You would be wrong.

First, a DA wouldn't touch it since it is a civil matter, not a criminal one.



Napster was sued under Intellectual property laws and found guilty of copyright infringement, not any form of theft.

It's theft in my jurisdiction. Although I don't know of any prosecutions, mostly because the people providing the stolen IP aren't located here.

Also, even under federal law, criminal copyright infringement is still criminal, not civil.

The federal act allowing prosecutions for certain types of noncommercial infringment is called the NET Act, with NET standing for "No Electronic Theft."

The Bureau of Justice Statistics categorizes these crimes as "Intellectual Property Theft."

As a practical matter, most IP holders prefer to sue because they can do so easily and don't have to convince prosecutors to take time away from prosecuting murders and rapes to bring thousands of small theft cases. But, legally, in jurisdictions that have adopted most forms of the model penal code, most forms of "software piracy" would could be prosecuted as "theft".

[shanghaichica]

I wouldn't if I were you. Personally if I bought a kindle with loads pre-loaded books I would be delighted, but others may want to get you in trouble. It's a nice gesture but it's too risky.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

Unless a book is offered for free by the author or publisher, downloading a book from an unauthorized site is illegal. It is the same thing as walking into a bookstore and walking out of the bookstore without paying for the hardback you stuck in your backpack. It might feel different since you are not physically walking into a store, looking around to see if anyone is watching, putting the book in your back pack, and walking out hoping not to get caught but that is only because you are sitting at home clicking a few buttons.

Shoplifting a book and downloading a pirated copy both mean that the store, the publisher, and the author do not get paid. Both are theft. This is not negligible. It might be a misdomeaner, depending on how much the book costs and how many you steal, but it is still theft.

Selling stolen material is simply a second crime that you are committing.

There is nothing legal or moral about either action.

Actually downloading e-books is not stealing. If you steal something the item isn't there anymore. Illegal downloading is a copyright violation but not stealing.

So the word pirating might be wrong, too.

I suggest you get your facts straight.

[reech]

I think the core fact - it's wrong - is still spot on.

You are acquring a distinct item that you have not purchased, and the owner of the item has not received payment for said item.

Now yes, there's the whole thing about 'I had licences' and 'what do you mean the thing I purchased 10 years ago I don't actually *own*' but that's an argument that hasn't been placed in law, so there's been no try out.

So pirating and illegal may very well be emotive terms. They *might* even be correct. But really, nothing about how it's argued out really matters.

The companies say it's wrong. The owners of said work say it's wrong. You can listen to them, and be a 'good' person. Or you can ignore them, get stuff questionably and you're a 'bad person'. Whether or not you get caught \ fined \ jailed or not is immaterial - it's just not the *right* thing to do!

(Personally, I think there should be some way to prove ownership of, say, the physical book, and then get a discounted e-version. However, there is no way this could be policed - you could copy a barcode from a shop to get round it, or borrow a friend's receipt - I know I haven't kept my last 10 physical book receipts!)

Amazon's Kindle is in a much better position to stop piracy due to the cost of the books, and the convenience of getting them - it's up to people who own them to decide if they're going to be 'good' or 'bad'.

[Nexutix]

Originally Posted by Esquire1

This thread slaps the face of the many authors on this forum. No one can stop you from stealing (read: not 'acquiring') but you don't have to flaunt it around.

TRUE.

[karthwyne]

Originally Posted by reech

The companies say it's wrong. The owners of said work say it's wrong.

No problem with your post, just that not all creators of the work say it is wrong. There are quite a few artists in the music industry that encourage you to download their music. A few that even support a model where all the music is free and they make money on merchandising/concerts. That model certainly would not work well in the book field.

[OakIris]

I'm confused by this whole thing.

Amazon sent the OP a replacement Kindle for the one she had purchased that had the button fade issue. Regardless of the morality or lack of morality, or whatever, of having illegal books on the unit, isn't Amazon expecting to get the original Kindle back?

If she doesn't return it, won't she be obligated to send Amazon another $139 + shipping for the new Kindle she received from Amazon? They sent it to her in good faith, expecting to get her old Kindle back, so surely they will charge her full price for the replacement Kindle if she doesn't make the expected exchange.

Even if Love Bunny sells the defective Kindle, she isn't going to get full price for it, no matter what free/acquired/stolen books are on it because it is defective! So what exactly is the advantage to her? She's going to end up spending about $150 or more for a WiFi Kindle 3 -

Holly

[niceboy]

I'm just curious in regards to karthwyne's comments... does karthwyne or others think I am doing something illegal or just plain wrong if I buy a second or third or fifth-hand paperback at a used book store? How about if I borrow a book from a library? Do people think my mom is doing something illegal if she lends me a book? What if she lends me a book she bought second hand? Is it wrong if I read a book on the shelf at a bed & breakfast or cottage resort? How about a book or magazine at the hospital?

I don't actually get how public lending libraries fit in with intellectual property rights? I am not pro illegal book piracy but I am just sincerely confused by the different standards that seem to apply to paper books and ebooks. I am wondering if people who think lending an eBook is theft also think borrowing a library book is theft. Do they think it is alright for someone to borrow a novel from the library or use a non-circulating reference book? How exactly is that not theft?

Are the above common practices in regards to paper books theft? Are they legal? Why do they seem to be socially acceptable? In the US are there specific laws that permit libraries to lend books and doctors to let people read magazines in the waiting room and church congregants to share common prayer and song books?

Is it okay for charities to send books to prisoners and soldiers to share among themselves? I just read an interview of a librarian who had worked at the Rikers Island facility... he was saying how best selling crime novels and thrillers were popular among the inmates and that the state was actually mandated to share these books among the prisoners. In the conversation there was no indication that either person thought the state was acting illegally in this.

I am honestly confused by the difference in what it seems people think is appropriate when it comes to eBooks as opposed to paper books and I would love to better understand the difference.

[Skydog]

Originally Posted by hellraiser06

WHY WOULD YOU WANNA SELL IT, WHEN YOU CAN RETURN IT FOR A FULL REFUND?

Because the OP intends to make a profit by selling it with stolen goods.

Unbelievable.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by OakIris

I'm confused by this whole thing.

Amazon sent the OP a replacement Kindle for the one she had purchased that had the button fade issue. Regardless of the morality or lack of morality, or whatever, of having illegal books on the unit, isn't Amazon expecting to get the original Kindle back?

If she doesn't return it, won't she be obligated to send Amazon another $139 + shipping for the new Kindle she received from Amazon? They sent it to her in good faith, expecting to get her old Kindle back, so surely they will charge her full price for the replacement Kindle if she doesn't make the expected exchange.


Holly

Her thoughts are to sell it at more than retail because of the books she's loaded onto it.

Then she can pay the $139 and still be ahead.

Tho, again, why anyone would buy a USED kindle with books they can download with just a little research for free......
Instead of buying a NEW Kindle and getting them themselves, (IF they choose to) is the question.

Guess there is one born every minute.

[ProfCrash]

Originally Posted by niceboy

I'm just curious in regards to karthwyne's comments... does karthwyne or others think I am doing something illegal or just plain wrong if I buy a second or third or fifth-hand paperback at a used book store? How about if I borrow a book from a library? Do people think my mom is doing something illegal if she lends me a book? What if she lends me a book she bought second hand? Is it wrong if I read a book on the shelf at a bed & breakfast or cottage resort? How about a book or magazine at the hospital?

I don't actually get how public lending libraries fit in with intellectual property rights? I am not pro illegal book piracy but I am just sincerely confused by the different standards that seem to apply to paper books and ebooks. I am wondering if people who think lending an eBook is theft also think borrowing a library book is theft. Do they think it is alright for someone to borrow a novel from the library or use a non-circulating reference book? How exactly is that not theft?

Are the above common practices in regards to paper books theft? Are they legal? Why do they seem to be socially acceptable? In the US are there specific laws that permit libraries to lend books and doctors to let people read magazines in the waiting room and church congregants to share common prayer and song books?

Is it okay for charities to send books to prisoners and soldiers to share among themselves? I just read an interview of a librarian who had worked at the Rikers Island facility... he was saying how best selling crime novels and thrillers were popular among the inmates and that the state was actually mandated to share these books among the prisoners. In the conversation there was no indication that either person thought the state was acting illegally in this.

I am honestly confused by the difference in what it seems people think is appropriate when it comes to eBooks as opposed to paper books and I would love to better understand the difference.

Libraries pay a higher price for their books because it is going to be lent out to multiple people. They have a special type of license that comes with the purchase of the book.

Used bookstores exist because someone paid for the book at some point in time. I suppose someone could steal a bunch of books and sell them to a used bookstore who then sells the stolen property but I am guessing that is pretty rare. Why? Mainly because it is not all that profitable to sell books to a used book store so theives are better off stealing other items.

Additionally, only one person can read a book checked out from a library at a time and only one person can read a book bought at a used book store at a time.

Someone who has pirated a book and placed it on the internet does not fall into these catagories. Additionally, the pirated copy of the book can be read by thousands of people at a time.

A book downloaded from an illegal source, the darknet or whatever you want to call it, means that the Author is making no money. A book bought from an e-book store, or borrowed from the library means that the Author (and others of course) are making some money from the sale of their book.

It does not matter if the book is in physical form or electronic form, the Author is not being paid. You are stealing from the author.

[emalvick]

As far as stealing and copyright is concerned. Isn't copyright infringement just another form of stealing? i.e. stealing ideas.

As far as the physical books and lending, used books, etc. The used books (and used music) is something that I have always wondered about. The book was purchased once as a new item (where the creator is paid an appropriate percentage) but once it is sold to a seller of used items, the creator is is never compensated for that second sale are they?

I don't think it is necessarily wrong since the reality is that there is one physical copy with one physical sale that the author has been compensated on. However, it does seem like a used sale represents a potential sale for a second physical copy that hasn't otherwise occurred. Overall, I'm just expressing my thoughts, as I've purchased plenty of used books and music in the past, but it does seem like the original author or artist loses out somewhat from that seoncdary sale. Of course, the used market isn't much different than lending a book to someone since again there is only one physical copy.

It is the digital industry that makes things tricky. The ease of making multiple copies, etc. start to blur all the concepts that are simpler with physical objects. Even the idea of lending or even giving can be complicated. As shown in this thread and others it even gets more complicated when you start dealing with International Laws.

All I know, is that one's own sense of ethics is usually a good gage. I also think that a person asking a question such as the OP already knows the right answer, rather they are looking for confirmation that it is ok to go with what people generally consider wrong.

It's the attitude that has led to such a widespread problem of digital piracy. i.e. it can't be wrong if everyone is doing it.

[lebleaux]

It is an interesting thought process for me. One of the things I would like to do is to remove the many piles of books gathering dust in the corners of most rooms (I doubt that any book that has entered our house has ever left it) by replacing them with an electronic library. If I buy into the principle that there should not be two (or more) copies of a book in existence when the Author has only been paid for one (and the concept sits well with me) then I guess I should destroy the physical books as I go - which does not sit at all well. More thought required.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by lebleaux

It is an interesting thought process for me. One of the things I would like to do is to remove the many piles of books gathering dust in the corners of most rooms (I doubt that any book that has entered our house has ever left it) by replacing them with an electronic library. If I buy into the principle that there should not be two (or more) copies of a book in existence when the Author has only been paid for one (and the concept sits well with me) then I guess I should destroy the physical books as I go - which does not sit at all well. More thought required.

yeah... no...