Declaration of Independence

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by pking36330

No, you don't "have to steal", you CHOOSE to steal.

So that means you admit to being a pre-meditated thief. You are using these geographic, format, and copyright restrictions to justify your actions, but they don't...you are still a thief. You know you are wrong because you used the word "steal". There is no justification for theft.

I am not trying to justify it and frankly I don't care what you think of me, I am just stating a fact that if the publishers don't want me as a consumer, then I have only option of being a thief.

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

The best situation in your opinion.

Really, why should all books be made available for free or for a symbolic price? Someone has gone to the effort of writing that story so why should you not go to the effort of paying a reasonable price for it if you want to read it?

I'm all for libraries and if you want to wait in line until you can borrow a copy that is fine, but the idea that all books must be available for free to everyone is just plain selfish. The work you do you expect to be paid for don't you?

Cheers,
PKFFW

1. Symbolic price of 1$ would be a nice addition for the authors. As long as no one takes a cut of that. Because now, possibly up to 80% of your money doesn't go to the author, but rather to some middle-men.
2. If it was 1$, or even up to 3$, the price would be so low that piracy would almost completely disappear. Why bother looking for books, downloading from some garbage-level sources, if the real deal is so cheap. Anyone with a e-book reader could afford to purchase books. Obviously readers will become cheaper with time too.
3. There are still book collectors. Paper book is not only a nice interior element, but it also got style. Smell alone elevates a fresh book above e-book. So paper book would still keep it's price and possibly even become more valuable.
4. Friendly advice to publishers. Instead of trying to criminalize people, try adapting. Many people pirate because of money shortage, but there is also another reason. Movies/games/music/books, you name it everything is easier to access via illegal sources. If I wanted to purchase a movie, first problem I would encounter would be various geographical issues. Then of course shipping would cost extra money and time. After that I would obviously need to buy bluray player, because I got used to HDTV so much I could not possibly consider watching DVD quality movies. While I can do that with my laptop and 10$ costing hdmi cable, I wouldn't be able to watch it from bluray disk. When all those problems arise it's not hard to understand that money isn't the only reason people pirate.

[bill the smith]

@Fanas
You are right.
And the business model is already there - Apples iTunes shop is (I think) the biggest retailer of music in the US (or something).

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

@Fanas
You are right.
And the business model is already there - Apples iTunes shop is (I think) the biggest retailer of music in the US (or something).

But it won't sell to me :/

[BillSmithBooks]

I strongly favor the "symbolic price" ($1-3) model. (As part of no DRM, no geographic restrictions, allowing reasonable fair use such as backups and format shifting, etc.)

It's a better deal for readers (well, sure, not as good as theft, but still good) and a much better deal for the authors, since paying them directly means they get much more for each ebook sale than their paper book royalty.

It's also an approach that appeals to our better natures: People want to support the creators whose works they enjoy. They understand that books take a long time to write and that authors have bills to pay just as everyone else does.

Most reasonable people understand the equation:
(1) the author derives income from writing or
(2) people don't support the authors they like and writing becomes a "fit it in where you can" endeavor after the day job to pay for a roof, food and family expenses.

(2) means a lot fewer books by authors you like will be written. By supporting an author, he or she is able to spend more time creating more works for you to enjoy.

Bill
www.BillSmithBooks.com

[Fanas]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I strongly favor the "symbolic price" ($1-3) model. (As part of no DRM, no geographic restrictions, allowing reasonable fair use such as backups and format shifting, etc.)

It's a better deal for readers (well, sure, not as good as theft, but still good) and a much better deal for the authors, since paying them directly means they get much more for each ebook sale than their paper book royalty.

It's also an approach that appeals to our better natures: People want to support the creators whose works they enjoy. They understand that books take a long time to write and that authors have bills to pay just as everyone else does.

Most reasonable people understand the equation:
(1) the author derives income from writing or
(2) people don't support the authors they like and writing becomes a "fit it in where you can" endeavor after the day job to pay for a roof, food and family expenses.

(2) means a lot fewer books by authors you like will be written. By supporting an author, he or she is able to spend more time creating more works for you to enjoy.

Bill
www.BillSmithBooks.com

This model would be great, but before we can get this model we would need to:
1. Lobby for 0% VAT for books everywhere around the globe. As written word is foundation of education, 0% VAT should be as apparent as any human rights.
2. Make user-friendly online shop with a premise, that shop only provides platform, but the author itself is responsible for everything else. Author would need to provide a DRM and all other bullshit free file. And shop would take no more than 10%, to pay for hosting and admin salaries.
3. Sign a contract with some electronics company to provide an e-book reader series designed for this e-book shop.

It has apparent pros and no cons:
1. Author gets more.
2. People get it for less.
Everyone has more money, except for those money-leeches in between the consumer and the author.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

@HarryT
Well, it's a democracy so everyone has a right to their own view.
But I am very pleased that you are comfortable with 1 -9.

Number 8 says you can freely distribute eBooks without regard to paying the author. That is tantamount to permitting stealing (aka copyright infringing) someone else's stuff. So 8 and 10 are pure piracy.

Dale

[pking36330]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

I don't like pirates much, but name calling is _way_ out of line. Please do not repeat it.

Thanks Nate, I'll correct it to use the exact same word he used, thus not name-calling, just restating his admission:

Originally Posted by pking36330
No, you don't "have to steal", you CHOOSE to steal.

So that means you admit to being a pre-meditated steal-er. You are using these geographic, format, and copyright restrictions to justify your actions, but they don't...you are still a steal-er. You know you are wrong because you used the word "steal". There is no justification for steal-ing.

Hope this meets the standards. I'm sure fanas is a great person, I'm just incredulous at his assertion that because he wants something, he deserves to obtain it for free if the terms and conditions don't meet his liking. If he/she is a professor, then do students get to take his/her class free if they don't like the Registrar's method of requiring payment? If she/he is an auto-mechanic, does that mean a customer gets to drive off after the repair without paying because that repair isn't available locally and he/she had to drive across town/state/region to get the work done. I can't see anything but fanas trying to justify in his/her mind by justifying to others why its OK to steal (recall 'steal' was his/her admission in the first post).

[pking36330]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I strongly favor the "symbolic price" ($1-3) model.

So what you are saying is that you or some group get to decide what the price will be (the "symbolic" price) instead of the owner of the work (the author)? How is it you believe you should have more rights than the owner?

This really is Fantasy Forum.

[khalleron]

Bill,

You have no idea what 'Americo-centrism' is either!

The reason the Kindle isn't available in other countries yet is that the cellphone carriers necessary for the Whispernet to work have not been willing to hammer out deals with Amazon. The Kindle is coming to the UK - but it's not 'Americo-centrism' that keeps Amazon from selling you one.

The same with geographic restrictions on ebooks - it's the foreign publishers that won't allow American companies such as Fictionwise to sell you ebooks.

Believe me, there isn't an American company in existence that doesn't want to sell you stuff. That would be, uh, Un-American!

And NO! to number 10. People who write have a right to be paid for their work, just the same as you do.

[GntlmnBndt]

There are places online where stories are provided for free by the authors (such as fictionpress.com), hopefully in exchange for constructive feedback from their readers, or places like smashwords.com where many of the books are free, inexpensive or even allow the consumer to set a fair price. Both are excellent models, and I have read many books from both sites. True, you will have to wade through lots of very poor writing and poorly-categorized teen angst to get to the gems, but since you wish to forgo the editorial process of the large publishers, that is simply a fact of the matter -- the gems are there to be found.

Rather than trying to justify misappropriation of all the books any author has ever written, why not support the authors (and even those publishers) that make use of such consumer-friendly models?

The Bandit

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by pking36330

Thanks Nate, I'll correct it to use the exact same word he used, thus not name-calling, just restating his admission:

Now can we correct it to stop using the "steal" and "theft" nonsense?

[wayspooled]

Originally Posted by bill the smith

Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that books are knowledge and that knowledge is forever free".

I am totally opposed to:
1. DMR on books.
2. Geographic limits on sales of ereaders.
3. Geographic limits on purchase of ebooks.
4. Americo-centrism as the defining basis of the availability of literature.
5. Making criminals of those who download/possess/read ebooks which are not in the Public Domain.
6. Unreal copyright laws.

This means that I support:
7. Software that cracks/strips DRM.
8. Free distribution of any book which is electronic format.
9. Access for all ereaders and ebooks without geographical limitation.
10. "Warez" or "pirate sites” that make ebooks available to all – books for every person in every country for free.

Is anyone else on board?

Going to be a lot less books written if there are no copyright laws to protect an author's rights to the books they've written. That said, I think current copyright laws are designed to protect publishers, not authors. You think that in a future where paper publishing is headed for extinction, albeit a long time from now - Authors will write books for the pure pleasure of their audience? That's a joke. Have the fruit of their efforts spread freely across the world with no recompense for the author in his lifetime? And you think people will write books in order to do that? Fiction?

And when there are no longer "new" interesting books to read - take your thoughts out to a conclusion. Do the cause and effect and see how your proposals work out in the long term.

I see a world where people write books only to make their political point or push forth their cause - not to be "interesting or thought provoking" and coincidently - saleable... there will be less reading for pleasure which to me means - a dumber world with fewer readers.

I don't know exactly what copyright laws should be but I'm guessing something like author death + 5 years. And authors should be more easily able to bail out of a bad publishing contract.

And on this ebook/reader publishing topic anyway, I have a truth for you about the "Americans are the cause of all evil in the world" point of view. It's the other countries requiring the geographic limits on these things. Think.. What reason does some American company have for limiting their sales of readers or books? They want to make less money? Try to think beyond the "they've got something and I can't have it" mentality and go on to the why. You hear these xxx publishing limits sales to yyy scenarios, but it's because they're required to - and "xxx publishing" is stuck in your head as the cause.. and it's only the cause of your distress, it's not the cause of the requirement/limit...

If authors labor six months or a year or a lifetime writing something - why should you have a "right" to it? The idea annoys me in a visceral way. Your beliefs are not based on the good of humanity or the ideal of spreading knowledge, they're just based on "what you want" for yourself.

That said, again.. DRM or DMR whatever is an evil I despise, but suggest something else workable.

Baby steps.. Reduce copyright longevity, make laws protecting authors more and publishers less - but not get rid of them all or there will be no publishing which means what? Take it out to it's logical conclusion.. test and evaluate.. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't know what the answers are but I know they're not the anarchy you suggest, not at least as a benefit to humanity..

Rather than trying to justify misappropriation of all the books any author has ever written, why not support the authors (and even those publishers) that make use of such consumer-friendly models?

The Bandit

Agree wholeheartedly with that.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Now can we correct it to stop using the "steal" and "theft" nonsense?

"Steal", "theft", "copyright violation"... it's all semantics isn't it? You are gaining a benefit (reading the book) without compensating the creator/author for it. Do you feel you are entitled to someone elses work because it can be copied as easily as the drag of a mouse?

BOb

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by Fanas

I am not trying to justify it and frankly I don't care what you think of me, I am just stating a fact that if the publishers don't want me as a consumer, then I have only option of being a thief.

Frankly, from many posts in this forum it seems you'd prefer to have everything you ever wanted to read for free, regardless of whether or not the book is available to you for purchase.

A better argument could be made that food should be free, or toilet paper, or any necessity of life.

BTW in the US, "public" libraries are free; that comes with the term public. They are supported by tax dollars, which is why access is limited to those who live in a given geographic area.