Could the Kindle spark book piracy?

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, no, it's not.

To use an analogy, there's a big "black market" in the UK with people buying alcohol and cigarettes from France, where the taxes on these particular goods are much lower than here in the UK, and then re-selling them here. If I buy a bottle of Bell's whisky that someone has brought from France then I'm breaking the law in buying a bottle of whisky that hasn't had UK taxes paid on it. It doesn't matter that it's an identical bottle of whisky to the one that I could buy in my local supermarket and that, if I stood the two side by side, I couldn't tell which was which. One came from a legal source, the other from an illegal one.

Just had to comment on this- what an example of big govt. in action. You can buy an "illegal" bottle of Bell's, which I believe is distilled in Scotland, at a cheaper price if re-imported from France, which I presume has already had French taxes paid on it. Frankly, I think the solution here is for your govt. to reduce their taxes.

We have similar idiocy here- if you live in Ohio, the state rooks you on alcohol taxes. Kentucky does not, at least as badly. So, if you live along the border, in Cincinnati, for example, you drive over to Kentucky to buy liquor and save $5 per bottle or more. Illegal? Of course. Does everyone do it? Of course. Will anyone ever be convicted of smuggling 5 or 6 bottles of liquor across the border? Of course not. Not when your friendly neighborhood judge has stocked his basement bar with Kentucky liquor.

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

Your argument is wrong because you are comparing physical objects with digital files. Digital files can be copied infinitely, at almost zero cost per copy. In the case of the paperback, it costs money to produce, and raw materials. If one is stolen, somebody has lost some money.

So the proper comparison would be squatting. Let's say someone who doesn't want to be bothered getting his own place to live simply picks the locks (without doing any damage) and camps out in someone's home while they're away. As long as he doesn't do any damage or incur any additional charges for the owner, everything is cool, because the squatter is just using space that the homeowner wouldn't have had use of anyway.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

Just had to comment on this- what an example of big govt. in action. You can buy an "illegal" bottle of Bell's, which I believe is distilled in Scotland, at a cheaper price if re-imported from France, which I presume has already had French taxes paid on it. Frankly, I think the solution here is for your govt. to reduce their taxes.

It's just one of those things - the UK has always had high taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, and France has had lower taxes. On the other hand, the general rate of VAT is 19.6% in France, compared with 17.5% in the UK. The tax on cigarettes is deliberately very high in the UK as a means of trying to encourage people to stop smoking. It's an approach which appears to be working.

The different countries of the EU all tax things in slightly different ways, but the overall tax burden works out pretty similar in the end.

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

So the proper comparison would be squatting. Let's say someone who doesn't want to be bothered getting his own place to live simply picks the locks (without doing any damage) and camps out in someone's home while they're away. As long as he doesn't do any damage or incur any additional charges for the owner, everything is cool, because the squatter is just using space that the homeowner wouldn't have had use of anyway.

How would this be a proper comparison at all? He is living in a place, using facilities, and that costs money. Electric and gas cost money. He is invading privacy, and that has resulted in damages being awarded in many court cases. If he doesn't clean up after himself, he is costing money. The squatter is indeed causing a loss.

The question is, are we going to treat e-books like physical objects (like a hardcover book), or like a digital object (similar to a software program). If you treat ebooks like a physical object, which they are not, I think it is only reasonable that you award consumers the same rights that they would have if they buy a physical book- no DRM, right to resell, etc. Why should the consumer get the shaft if we are treating an e-book as a physical object?

If ebook consumers are shafted with bad pricing and worse laws, the ebook market will not grow. Period.

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

How would this be a proper comparison at all? He is living in a place, using facilities, and that costs money. Electric and gas cost money. He is invading privacy, and that has resulted in damages being awarded in many court cases. If he doesn't clean up after himself, he is costing money. The squatter is indeed causing a loss.

Who said he was using facilities? Who said he was using electricity or gas? Maybe he's just sitting quietly in the corner.

And you certainly can't fall back on the "right" to privacy. That's an even more nebulous legal fiction than copyright. As long as the squatter incurs no additional costs to the homeowner, it is exactly the same thing: making use of something without permission while not costing the homeowner anything.

[HarryT]

Perhaps someone pitching a tent in your front yard might be a better analogy. They aren't costing the homeowner anything by doing so, so where's the harm?

Of course, if this took place in Texas, someone would probably shoot them .

[astra]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

Who said he was using facilities? Who said he was using electricity or gas? Maybe he's just sitting quietly in the corner.

And you certainly can't fall back on the "right" to privacy. That's an even more nebulous legal fiction than copyright. As long as the squatter incurs no additional costs to the homeowner, it is exactly the same thing: making use of something without permission while not costing the homeowner anything.

With due respect, your example is out of line. You are getting a bit desperate...

[astra]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Of course, if this took place in Texas, someone would probably shoot them .

LOL.
They (the shooters) would be right, though

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

With due respect, yuor example is out of line. You are getting a bit desperate...

I'm open to rebuttal. And if I were proven wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. I'm not sure what "desperate" has to do with it, though. What is it that you think I'm desperate to do?

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Of course, if this took place in Texas, someone would probably shoot them .

Setting aside situations where the the Federal Immigration folks are on hand to protect the tent pitcher: yeah, their getting shot is a good possibility.

[astra]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

What is it that you think I'm desperate to do?

Desperate to prove your point.

[Nate the great]

I think piracy will increase, now that so many textbooks are available.

Which age group has the largest concentration of pirates? college students
What do they spend $400 to $800 on each semester? textbooks
If an illegal copy is known to be available, how likely is it that the average student will get it?

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

Desperate to prove your point.

As far as I know, I wasn't trying to prove any kind of point. I was simply suggesting a real-world model to supplant the terms "theft" and "piracy", since those terms don't work.

I guess, if you stretch it, you could say I was arguing in support of the proposition that copyright infringement is wrong by comparing it to a real-world model that is distasteful, but If I appeared desperate to prove that, it's probably just because I'm not as good a writer as I'd like to be.

[vivaldirules]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Of course, if this took place in Texas, someone would probably shoot them .

Probably witches. Burn 'em!

[NatCh]

There's always hanging ... yes, bullets are cheap, but you can use a rope over and over again.