Funny I don't feel like a criminal

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's because lending someone a physical book does not involve making a copy of it, hence (self-evidently) copyright does not enter into it. When you give someone a copy of an e-Book, the operative word is "copy", hence copyright law does apply.

Yeah, that's the central problem and what makes digital content so troublesome and worrisome for publishers and authors.

With a physical book that's bought legally, there's only one copy to float around (people could photo copy it, scan it etc. of course, but that's less of a problem as it's a hassle). You loan out your copy, you don't have yours anymore and only one person at a time can have your copy.

But with digital content you can give the file to a friend, then you both have copies. It's not really loaning since both copies work at the same time and can be kept permanently. And nothings stopping you from giving it to only one friend or family member while keeping your copy, or from people you give it to to make copies and pass on to their friends while keeping a copy for their self etc.

I don't think this super restrictive DRM is the way to go though, it goes too far in limiting how we can use e-books we buy ourselves. I say just scrap DRM and find more effective ways to enforce piracy than silly (and rare) huge lawsuits etc.

Or if we have to have DRM, build in lending capabilities so we can lend e-books to one other person for a set amount of time (and our copy isn't usable while they have it, just like you can't read a paper book while it's loaned out). Also build in the ability to permanently transfer a book to another person so you can sell or give away e-books you've read while not having the copy work on your account.

The problem their is that type of scheme isn't feasible until we have one e-book format so the scheme can be uniform across all devices etc. But when that's possible I think that's a viable option. It won't stop the out right pirates, but it will probably get the average legit user to not strip DRM and solve problems of a loaned e-book ending up in multiple people's hands as people pass it on while keeping their copy (rather than passing around a paper book).

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by darylbrayman

Last week I purchased Michael Crichton's newest book, Pirate Latitudes. Excellent book by the way. I read the book. I removed the book from my reader. Then I stripped the DRM and emailed the book to my mother. I am now a criminal. I didn't post the book onto the darknet. There is only one copy floating around, it is currently in my mothers possession. Unlike a physical copy it will probably end there as not enough of our friends and family have ebook readers (I'm working on that). As the title say's "Funny, I don't feel like a criminal".

What Canadian criminal law do you think you've violated? There are large lobby groups that intent to make it a crime but to my knowledge it isn't yet.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I didn't say that at all. Perhaps I misread the original post, but I believe that the original poster has given his mum a copy while retaining the book himself, and has made no attempt to delete it from his own machine. My apologies if I've misunderstood the intent.

Okay I re-read the OP and s/he does not explicitly say s/he deleted it. I did infer it by the statement "one copy", but I agree that is not clear.

I read your original response as saying even if you did delete it you still have copies in the catch. I see, from your post above, that is not what you were saying, my apologies.


=X=

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by =X=

Okay I re-read the OP and s/he does not explicitly say s/he deleted it. I did infer it by the statement "one copy", but I agree that is not clear.

Does that really matter either? If they're done reading the book, and then loan it to their mother, who cares if there is technically still a copy of the file on their PC. It makes no real difference.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Does that really matter either? If they're done reading the book, and then loan it to their mother, who cares if there is technically still a copy of the file on their PC. It makes no real difference.

That's the whole debate here, isn't it? If "common usage" says "I can read a book, and then give it to my mum", but copyright law says "oh no you can't, matey, because if you do so you've copied the book, and hence broken copyright law", then does copyright law "trump" the accepted practice of what you can do with a book?

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's the whole debate here, isn't it? If "common usage" says "I can read a book, and then give it to my mum", but copyright law says "oh no you can't, matey, because if you do so you've copied the book, and hence broken copyright law", then does copyright law "trump" the accepted practice of what you can do with a book?

Does copyright say you can't? US copyright law already says that incidental copies that are created during normal use don't matter. If loaning IP is legal, then incidental copies while loaning an eBook should fall under "normal use", right?

The DMCA would come into play if you have to strip the DRM in order to loan it to your mother, but copyright law shouldn't really treat a physical book any different from a digital book.

[Bremen Cole]

To the OP, remember we now have a US Government Czar looking over your shoulder http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...hstholders.ars .

As someone else posted, I have bought an ebook from Amazon, stripped the DRM so I could read it on my Sony. I am at least one person (I bet there are a few more) that if I could not liberate their books, they would not get any business from me.....

Oh and I share these books that I liberate with my wife.... and sometimes they occupy two readers at the same time..... It should be noted that with the DRM it would be acceptable for them to be on two authorized readers.... I just do it without the DRM.....

Come and get me Czar and her minions......

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Does copyright say you can't? US copyright law already says that incidental copies that are created during normal use don't matter. If loaning IP is legal, then incidental copies while loaning an eBook should fall under "normal use", right?

I think we have to consider two separate issues here:

1. As you say, incidental copies created during normal use are clearly permitted by copyright law since, practically speaking, you can't really do anything with a digital file that doesn't involve copies being made - not even reading it.

2. The issue of what, if anything, you are obliged to do with your own copy when you give the book to someone else. Is merely refraining from reading your own copy sufficient? I'd guess it probably isn't - copyright is about "possession, not "usage". Is making a reasonable endeavor to delete copies from your reading device and PC sufficient? I would hope that it is, but until this is tested in court, we really don't know the answer, do we?

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I think we have to consider two separate issues here:

1. As you say, incidental copies created during normal use are clearly permitted by copyright law since, practically speaking, you can't really do anything with a digital file that doesn't involve copies being made - not even reading it.

2. The issue of what, if anything, you are obliged to do with your own copy when you give the book to someone else. Is merely refraining from reading your own copy sufficient? I'd guess it probably isn't - copyright is about "possession, not "usage". Is making a reasonable endeavor to delete copies from your reading device and PC sufficient? I would hope that it is, but until this is tested in court, we really don't know the answer, do we?

Yep. Number 2 is the rub, and copyright law with have to be changed/clarified to deal with these types of issues that pop up with digital content that weren't possible with print content. Fair Use laws need a great deal of specification as they're too vague even with print, and woefully inadequate for defining what one can or can't do with digital content they bought.

[MrBlueSky]

Welcome to the Darkside everyone!

Experience how nice it feels when you throw of the yolk of your monopolist oppressors

THIS is exactly why the copyright maximiists are so afraid. You have your justification for copying files, I have mine, he has has and others have theirs. Everybody is different — yet everybody is the same in their eyes.

Of course, your loved ones would NEVER lend ‘their’ copy to another of their loved ones, and their other loved ones would never ‘lend’ a copy to their significant others/friends, and five or more iterations down the line, 'your' first copy would never find is way on to a file-sharing sites.

it always starts with the first little step…

Seriously folks, one a copy is out of your physical control you no longer have any say in over where it ends up — no matter how much you ’trust’ the recipient — just like secrets, the only way to keep one secure is to never ever let another living person have access.

The copyright maximilists KNOW their position is untenable and the more the so-called ‘upstanding citizen’ ignores the ‘letter of the law’ the more irrelevant it becomes.

And no, before anyone say it —there is no such thing as being ‘a little bit pregnant’.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

2. The issue of what, if anything, you are obliged to do with your own copy when you give the book to someone else.

It's not really that big of an issue. Say that the courts do come out and say you need to delete your own copy... OK... delete it then. It's not difficult.

I also seriously doubt you're ever going to see someone taken to court because they loaned a copy to their mother but neglected to delete the file from their own PC. The copyright holders would never know it was happening, and likely wouldn't care either.

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by darylbrayman

Last week I purchased Michael Crichton's newest book, Pirate Latitudes. Excellent book by the way. I read the book. I removed the book from my reader. Then I stripped the DRM and emailed the book to my mother. I am now a criminal. I didn't post the book onto the darknet. There is only one copy floating around, it is currently in my mothers possession. Unlike a physical copy it will probably end there as not enough of our friends and family have ebook readers (I'm working on that). As the title say's "Funny, I don't feel like a criminal".

Okay. First thing, GET YOUR MOTHER A Kindle registered to YOUR Amazon account!!! Two Kindles on the account means they can share the books purchased for either device. I have two K2s on my Amazon account and Mom uses one; I use the other.

Second thing, go out and kill twenty enemies. After having done so, you'll feel MUCH LESS guilt over sharing the book with your mother.

Derek

[CyGuy]

You certainly don't seem to have a Pirate (L)attitude.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's not really that big of an issue. Say that the courts do come out and say you need to delete your own copy... OK... delete it then. It's not difficult.

I also seriously doubt you're ever going to see someone taken to court because they loaned a copy to their mother but neglected to delete the file from their own PC. The copyright holders would never know it was happening, and likely wouldn't care either.

Yeah, I don't see that becoming a huge copyright issue.

They're going to focus, and rightly so, on those putting files on the darknets for anyone to grab, and maybe some on people downloading files from the darknets.

Publishers have always lost sales as people borrow books, check them out from the library etc. I don't see them losing a lot of sleep over loaning of e-books. They don't like it--just like they don't like loaning and used books sales for paper books etc., but not much they can do about it since it's near impossible to detect with e-books, and people have full rights to loan, sell, donate etc. their physical content whether they like it or not.

At most they work on getting some lending system in place like the Nooks to try to prevent lent copies from moving on down the chain of people the person borrowing it knows etc. But even that may be more trouble than it's worth.

But they can work to fight online piracy, and that will be their focus. Worry about the people who get your content without every paying for it and try to pass it on to tons of others etc. Not someone who bought it sharing it with a few people like they have your paper books for years.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Okay. First thing, GET YOUR MOTHER A Kindle registered to YOUR Amazon account!!! Two Kindles on the account means they can share the books purchased for either device. I have two K2s on my Amazon account and Mom uses one; I use the other.

Second thing, go out and kill twenty enemies. After having done so, you'll feel MUCH LESS guilt over sharing the book with your mother.

Derek

When I bought my sister a Kindle, the plan was to have it on my account. She's disabled and not working. Money's tight but she couldn't agree to accept me paying for her books. His mom may not want to be on his account, either. Maybe it's the money. Maybe she just wants her reading habits private.

Besides, there's also the hassle. Shopping from the Kindle is a bit of a pain but if she wants to shop from her computer, she'd need the login for his account. Not that he couldn't trust her with it but maybe he wants privacy, too. My husband doesn't have my login. Mostly it's just because I wouldn't want him to see when I've bought him a surprise. So that means he's stuck shopping on the Kindle unless I'm around. We at least live in the same house so it's pretty simple. It would be nice if you could link Kindle users into a family group the way you do with Prime rather than having it all tied to one account.