EU Piracy Report

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Because that's always productive.

But for the record, if by "If unavailable, I buy a copy from overseas" you mean "If unavailable, I lie to thwart your publisher's geo-restrictions", I would be equally uncomfortable admitting to being a liar or a thief.

Well, that's on you, I guess. I find nothing wrong with it, even though I've never bothered doing it myself.

Now that you know DRM removal is underhanded, are you going to stop? You are after all, lying by knowingly breaking terms and conditions you agreed to.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Now that you know DRM removal is underhanded, are you going to stop?

I've no idea why you believe that's relevant (and for the record, I've always known DRM-removal was on shaky moral ground). But yes. I find myself removing DRM less and less. For reasons of practicality and conscience. I suspect I will stop altogether sooner rather than later.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I've no idea why you believe that's relevant.

I guess it's because of the high-handed tone of your posts concerning geo-restrictions. Perhaps you don't mean to come off that way, but I notice when you are talking about something you don't do, you say things like:

"I lie to thwart your publisher's geo-restrictions", I would be equally uncomfortable admitting to being a liar or a thief.

Yet when discussing morally dubious things you do participate in, your tone is much more subtle:

I've always known DRM-removal was on shaky moral ground.

[DiapDealer]

That's only because I personally find both lying to get something I'm not entitled to, and stealing to get something I'm not entitled to reprehensible.

If you find my breaking of the terms of service by removing DRM from something I'm entitled to have in my possession equally reprehensible, then by all means step in the stirrup and take me to task for it. I'm no shrinking violet.

[darryl]

I heard the just haggling story with Winston Churchill as the protagonist. It seems I was wrong, as we have all been.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/

[issybird]

Originally Posted by darryl

I heard the just haggling story with Winston Churchill as the protagonist. It seems I was wrong, as we have all been.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/

Fantastic. Thank you.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's only because I personally find both lying to get something I'm not entitled to, and stealing to get something I'm not entitled to reprehensible.

If you find my breaking of the terms of service by removing DRM from something I'm entitled to have in my possession equally reprehensible, then by all means step in the stirrup and take me to task for it. I'm no shrinking violet.

You agree to the terms, yet break them every time you remove DRM. If you promise not to do something, then you do it, you are a liar.

Welcome to the cesspool, my friend. The waters are fine and the natives friendly.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by issybird

Huh. I knew I'd read this, so I took a look and it's available for US Kindle for only 99¢ to buy or free to read at KU. Here:

https://smile.amazon.com/Prince-Plea...1873198&sr=1-8

Thanks. I missed that.

Perhaps the geo-restriction problem is, without much publicity, being quietly solved.

So, do you recommend Prince of Pleasure?

EDITED: This is what misled me:
https://www.amazon.com/Prince-Pleasu...sap_bc?ie=UTF8

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

As Judge Dredd says 'ignorance of the law is no excuse!'

I'm pretty sure that in order to purchase an e-book from anywhere, you have to create an account, part of which requires an agreement to their terms and conditions.

Maybe for those who obtained an Amazon account after they started selling ebooks I'm fairly certain when I set up my Amazon account the terms and conditions I agreed to said nothing about not removing DRM from ebooks.

On a more serious note I was simply stating that disobedience is often considered to be morally different then falsifying information. Consider how few drivers have moral concerns about disobeying the traffic laws to do with speed.

[disconnected]

Originally Posted by ekbell

On a more serious note I was simply stating that disobedience is often considered to be morally different then falsifying information. Consider how few drivers have moral concerns about disobeying the traffic laws to do with speed.

That one always puzzles me, and I hear it a lot. Most discussions of morality seem to be only concerned with the effect on the person performing an action (self-respect, conscience, immortal soul, whatever), rather than on anyone else who might be affected.

As a potential victim, I'd a lot rather be lied to or stolen from than crashed into.

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by disconnected

That one always puzzles me, and I hear it a lot. Most discussions of morality seem to be only concerned with the effect on the person performing an action (self-respect, conscience, immortal soul, whatever), rather than on anyone else who might be affected.

As a potential victim, I'd a lot rather be lied to or stolen from than crashed into.

No one thinks that their speeding will lead to a crash.

[disconnected]

Originally Posted by ekbell

No one thinks that their speeding will lead to a crash.

True. I'm not convinced though.

[HarryT]

Personally speaking, my conscience is clear about both buying books from different countries and removing DRM for personal use. In both cases, the author has been paid for the sale, and nobody has lost anything. I have no moral qualms about either activity.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by ekbell

Maybe for those who obtained an Amazon account after they started selling ebooks I'm fairly certain when I set up my Amazon account the terms and conditions I agreed to said nothing about not removing DRM from ebooks.

My Judge Dredd quote handled that argument for you.

On a more serious note I was simply stating that disobedience is often considered to be morally different then falsifying information. Consider how few drivers have moral concerns about disobeying the traffic laws to do with speed.

Now you are saying all immoral acts are not on the same level. Stripping DRM is a lesser offence to you than busting geo-restrictions (though both involve lying). Much like when I said busting geo-restrictions is a lesser offence than pirating the book.

You better watch out. We are dangerously close to agreement.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Now you are saying all immoral acts are not on the same level. Stripping DRM is a lesser offence to you than busting geo-restrictions (though both involve lying).

You've not really convinced me that stripping drm involves lying. I may be legally bound by the ToS, but I spoke, nor typed, nor presented any false information. I didn't lie to anyone. Clicking the button may have bound me legally, but that's an entirely different thing. Not that breaking a contract or disobeying a rule couldn't be considered immoral itself.