Loaning E-Books

[Deskisamess]

They expect you to buy a new book for each device...

You can have several Kindle devices and apps registered to the same Amazon account, and most books can be on 6 devices at the same time. This works well for most users, myself included. My husband has a Kindle on my account, and for a while, my elderly mom used a Kindle of mine to read my books. She struggled with it, and no longer does. I also have a couple of iDevices running the Kindle app. All within the boundaries set up by Amazon.

I do admit to stripping DRM from some, for use on a Kobo, a few years ago. And I did it to a few reference type books with tighter simultaneous use limits, because I wanted them on more than 1 iDevice.

Of all the DRM freed books I have, I've never given any away to anyone. But I would load up one of my spare Kindles and share it with a few close friends if it ever came up. I can't think of anyone in my sphere who would have any inkling or knowledge of copying or taking any of the books. Most of my women friends are barely able to use a cell phone. Something that really bugs me.

[Aleron Ives]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm tired of discussing the the "morality" of ebook lending. I'm tired of any conversation about ebooks that starts from a baseline of assuming that all post-purchase practices done with pbooks can (and presumably should) be able to be adapted to ebooks.

That's fine, but then why participate in the thread if you're tired of the topic? Some of us just started using e-books and haven't given much thought to these matters before, so we want to discuss them.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

That's fine, but then why participate in the thread if you're tired of the topic?

Because there's always the hope that it won't go down the same path as the past 100. But I see I'm wrong. And because maybe--just maybe--I can convince some that ebooks will never have all the perks of pbooks (and vice versa). Resulting in less rehashing of worn out topics with each new generation of ebook adopters.

[Apache]

I share my library with my wife. We have quite a few authors in common. I used to share with my mother, until her macular degeneration got to bad to read. She now listens to free audiobooks through the NLS (The National Library Service for the Blind and Print Disabled). https://www.loc.gov/nls/about/news/
Apache

[Renate]

Eh, I'm only responsible for my own morality.
I have few bought ebooks, it's mostly PD or OverDrive.
Even though I do 99% of my reading on my Poke3 I always keep everything on my phone too.
For books that I borrow I would lend a spare device to a friend when I have finished the ebook and it hasn't expired.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It is my position that the casual sharing of copyrighted ebooks (done by any home-brewed method that creates additional copies of said ebooks that subsequently leave your possession) is copyright violation. Period.

Of course it's copyright violation. No one has said it isn't.

I would share my ebooks with my closest family members/friends if they read ebooks (which they don't). I would not expect them to delete their copies afterwards. Is it legally wrong? Of course. Is it morally wrong? Probably. But I'd still do it.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Of course it's copyright violation. No one has said it isn't.

I would share my ebooks with my closest family members/friends if they read ebooks (which they don't). I would not expect them to delete their copies afterwards. Is it legally wrong? Of course. Is it morally wrong? Probably. But I'd still do it.

You're not waffling. Many people do. It's the attempt to justify because "we could do it with pbooks" that I object to. Owning it--as you just did--is fine. Leave pbooks out of your (rhetorical) reasoning for doing it. They're not relevant.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Of course it's copyright violation. No one has said it isn't.

I would share my ebooks with my closest family members/friends if they read ebooks (which they don't). I would not expect them to delete their copies afterwards. Is it legally wrong? Of course. Is it morally wrong? Probably. But I'd still do it.

Morally wrong, I say no. I know the copies I give out will be deleted and not given out to anyone else.

I would say it's morally wrong if there's a chance copies will be made and given out to others that you didn't give them too or the person you gave a copy to keeps the eBook.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I would say it's morally wrong if there's a chance copies will be made and given out to others that you didn't give them too or the person you gave a copy to keeps the eBook.

Of course they'd keep the ebooks (whether they'd ever reread them... probably not). That's why I said "share", not "loan". It's not likely they'd give copies to other people, as very few here read ebooks at all, and I would ask them not to. And yeah, sharing ebooks this way with even a select few people is certainly illegal and in the eyes of many posters here morally wrong.

[haertig]

You cannot loan a digital file. You can only give it.

And I would have no problem giving an ebook to a friend. I don't claim this is moral, ethical, or right. Nor do I care. I feel zero need to justify my statement. It is simply a statement of how I feel. If I had the slightest inkling that this friend would try to sell the copy of the file I gave them or post it up on a website for the general public to access, I would not give it to them. But I don't have friends like that, so I need not concern myself with that possibility.

And I have no problem if others want to call me immoral. Because in my experience, the first to call you immoral are usually the least moral themselves. Despite how they falsely try to present themselves.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by haertig

Because in my experience, the first to call you immoral are usually the least moral themselves.

But all the ones after that first one are paragons of virtue, right?

[Apache]

Ever notice how crooks seem to believe everyone is dishonest, they just haven't been caught yet.
Apache

[haertig]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

But all the ones after that first one are paragons of virtue, right?

I gotta learn to be more specific and less open ended...

[graycyn]

I will share with my husband, no one else. Where possible, I do it legitimately through the Amazon household/family program. However, as we are a Kobo/Kindle household, and I prefer to buy on Kobo, on rare occasion, I'll strip DRM from my purchase, and then send it to his Kindle.

I think it gets very iffy sharing with friends or non-household family, because they can be so easily tempted to share with their friends, and so on, so forth. Plus, by sharing with them, you kind of set the example that it's "OK" when such sharing can impact an author's earnings.

I absolutely know my husband isn't the sort to share books. His family aren't readers, he really doesn't have close friends. He does no social media. And he's just too lazy to be bothered.

Now, if I like a book, and think a friend would enjoy it, I might sometimes gift them a copy if they have a Kindle. Or, recommend they look for it amongst their library's ebook offerings.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by graycyn

I think it gets very iffy sharing with friends or non-household family, because they can be so easily tempted to share with their friends, and so on, so forth.

That's presuming those friends of my friends

1. read books at all
2. read the genres I read
3. read ebooks

It's pretty rare here for all three to be true. They're not actually true for anyone I know besides myself, so I have shared my ebooks with exactly zero people so far.

Even if a close friend or a family member who happens to read books and likes the same genres I do (only two such persons actually exist) felt a desire to try ebooks one day, it's highly unlikely they'd find anyone else interested in my ebooks. Even if they ignored my request not to share the files further, which is also not likely.

Most people don't read books, and ebooks aren't popular among those who do, at least here. I guess it's different in the US.