08-15-2012, 05:41 PM | #61 | |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 72,162
Karma: 308792702
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
|
|
08-15-2012, 07:30 PM | #62 |
Fanatic
Posts: 519
Karma: 2693434
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Device: Cybook Gen 3, Pocketbook 902, Sony 650
|
Well, it seems that, by and large, most posters agree with the summary you posted way back in post #2.
It is interesting, however, that all of the arguments for and against your propositions have been based on economic, quasi-economic or legal grounds. None (as far as I can decipher them) on ethical grounds. Probably because it wasn't a question of ethics in the first place, there never having been any valid moral or ethical justification for monopoly intellectual property rights. |
08-15-2012, 07:33 PM | #63 |
temp. out of service
Posts: 2,795
Karma: 24285242
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Duisburg (DE)
Device: PB 623
|
A book re-sold does return (usually part) of the payment (from which the author got his share) of the 1st time purchase to the reseller. No new item having value is created. Same as you keep the original and private copies all to you. No no value is traded. If you create a copy and put the original back into circulation you get value back from reselling the original AND keep the value of having the content in copy. Total value from your POV grows without the author having a share of it.
|
08-15-2012, 08:19 PM | #64 | |
temp. out of service
Posts: 2,795
Karma: 24285242
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Duisburg (DE)
Device: PB 623
|
Quote:
Without IP protection a creator receives sure payment for 1st copy only. As every copist could ask for. Thus only the transfer from mind to medium is credited. Just the manual and none of the mental part of the creators work. This would declare the creative process worthless. Only by granting "shares" in copies created you honour the fact that without the creators minds work the physical copies wouldn't exist. IMHO the decision whether we value labour of mind and creativity or if we limit this to physical activity only is very much a decision based on ethics because if we would limit our judgements to physical consequences only a lot more than property would be differently judged: No intent or motives checked: there goes the diference between accident, self-defence and murder. No relevance of feelings: parenting=breeding; etc. |
|
08-15-2012, 09:40 PM | #65 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 519
Karma: 2693434
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Device: Cybook Gen 3, Pocketbook 902, Sony 650
|
Quote:
|
|
08-16-2012, 12:37 AM | #66 |
Zealot
Posts: 104
Karma: 672100
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Device: Sony prs650, Boox M92, Samsung Slate 7
|
The ethical principle is that of respect of private property. Some legal person owns the copyright of the book and unless you obtain their written permission beforehand, copying the book is an injury to their property, whether it is directly measurable in dollars or not, whether the copy is shared or not.
The principle by which creative products are assigned the status of property of the creator, in the first instance is a separate one. One might be opposed to the second principle but support the first, in which case the ethical obligation to not to copy a book would be unchanged. |
08-16-2012, 12:40 AM | #67 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,538
Karma: 264065402
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Taiwan
Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD
|
We grant monopolies for every single physical items (except for commodities), why not for creative works that exist in digital form? You even have a monopoly on intangibles like your labor (I can't order you mow my lawn for free),
|
08-16-2012, 01:04 AM | #68 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 519
Karma: 2693434
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Device: Cybook Gen 3, Pocketbook 902, Sony 650
|
Quote:
I am yet to see in this thread any basis for the assertion that it is an ethical principle, rather than merely a utilitarian or legal one. |
|
08-16-2012, 02:17 AM | #69 | |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 72,162
Karma: 308792702
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
First and foremost, to encourage the creation of "intellectual property". |
|
08-16-2012, 02:20 AM | #70 |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 72,162
Karma: 308792702
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
|
08-16-2012, 03:29 AM | #71 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,538
Karma: 264065402
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Taiwan
Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD
|
|
08-16-2012, 04:51 AM | #72 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 519
Karma: 2693434
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Device: Cybook Gen 3, Pocketbook 902, Sony 650
|
Quote:
The argument, of course, in favour of granting IPRs is that it has the social benefit of encouraging creativity sooner rather than later; and that this outweighs the social cost of limiting the use of the results of that creativity. I don't know whether either half of the equation is correct, but it is clearly a utilitarian argument rather than an ethical one. |
|
08-16-2012, 05:47 AM | #73 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
What? An utilitarian argument is of course an ethical argument. Or do you ask about arguments for being an utilitarianist?
Last edited by tompe; 08-16-2012 at 08:45 AM. |
08-16-2012, 05:50 AM | #74 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
But you did not argue in that way. Your argument seemed to be a rights based argument since you said that the important thing was that the author was compensated. If you wanted to stimulate creation then you have not shown that photocopying of books you borrow does not have a net positive effect on creation compared to not photocopying and mutatis mutandis.
|
08-16-2012, 07:59 AM | #75 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 519
Karma: 2693434
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Device: Cybook Gen 3, Pocketbook 902, Sony 650
|
Quote:
I was drawing the distinction between moral/ethical arguments, and those based purely on utility in the sense of "what makes things work" - not in the technical sense used in ethical utilitarianism. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Possible to print a listing of books? | TdeV | Library Management | 13 | 06-17-2011 10:12 AM |
Amazon Now Selling More Kindle Books Than All Print Books | =X= | News | 27 | 05-24-2011 08:05 AM |
E-Books Outsell Print Books at Amazon - NY Times | KenIsaacson | News | 1 | 05-20-2011 07:52 AM |
print a list of my books? | StickMaker | Amazon Kindle | 11 | 03-04-2011 10:34 AM |
Releasing Out of Print Books? | KindleKid | Reading Recommendations | 6 | 12-05-2008 03:24 PM |