Author Topic: So, about book piracy.  (Read 23947 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Elephant Jack

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 57
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2008, 08:37:46 AM »
Where do you get your .pdfs? The ones me and aftercrescent have we got for free.
Well, actually I thought of the "original" pdfs. The ones roleplaying game publishers offer - check out www.drivethrustuff.com.
Of course - I could download all the stuff I need illegaly, but that's not the point (at least not in my argumentation). I'm saying the whole piracy thing would be not that big, if (rpg-)publishers would publish "cheap" pdfs (or at least reasonable priced). Instead they offer most books for hc-prices.

EJ

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #41 on: June 30, 2008, 07:44:51 AM »
our university's library (which has free printing)

Lucky basterds.

Rev

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #42 on: June 30, 2008, 03:46:27 PM »
I'm saying the whole piracy thing would be not that big, if (rpg-)publishers would publish "cheap" pdfs (or at least reasonable priced). Instead they offer most books for hc-prices.

I completely agree. However, this is made a little more complicated by printing quantities.

Basically, it's not in the companies interests to have people prefer to buy PDF's - because it costs them money due to lower size print runs (smaller bulk discount effectively) & unsold hard copy books.

It seems counterintuitive - but quite often a company genuinely can't afford to price their PDF's much lower than their hard copies.

On the other hand, they'd probably pick up a lot more sales on PDF if they just dropped out the PDF printing costs.
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

Vindiction7

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 34
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2008, 07:27:07 PM »

+1 for buying anything that is 'worth' it.

that goes for books or what ever 'product' you want to consider.

Definitely.  I always pay up if I like some PDF or something I see.

Sirperry

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Pbbbbth !
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #44 on: July 30, 2008, 05:20:12 AM »
The bottom line is that it is theft if you download something without paying for it. 

You simply have to decide for yourself if you can live with being a thief.

And before I get flamed for being holier than thou, let me say that, yes, I have pirated material.
There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #45 on: July 30, 2008, 01:53:04 PM »
The bottom line is that it is theft if you download something without paying for it. 

You simply have to decide for yourself if you can live with being a thief.

And before I get flamed for being holier than thou, let me say that, yes, I have pirated material.

I never have and never will consider pirating materials that I wouldn't have to ay for anyway theft, especially when I am more likely to give that company involved money after having downloaded the product than I was before doing so.

Or is it a crime for a friend to loan me their book? To rip me a copy of a CD? To let me watch a movie over at their house? To make me a VHS copy of a movie? To write down a quote they heard so I can read it myself?

Selling without a license is far different, as is even non-monetary mass distribution, I agree. But small time sharing among a community, the only thing I do with music and files, being 'against intellectual property law' is something I will always consider just as unjust a law if it was suddenly illegal for you to lend me your shoes.

Sirperry

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Pbbbbth !
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #46 on: July 30, 2008, 05:49:23 PM »
It is not a crime to loan a book.  It IS a crime to photocopy it for them to read.

It is not a crime to lend them a CD.  It IS a crime to burn it and give it away.  Same with VHS or anything else.

It does not matter if YOU think the law is unjust, it is still the law and you are a criminal if you break it.

I make a choice to break laws intentionally that I do not agree with, but I am aware that my actions are illegal.  It just depends on how honest you are with yourself.
There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #47 on: July 30, 2008, 06:00:21 PM »
It is not a crime to loan a book.  It IS a crime to photocopy it for them to read.

So where is the distinction in me lending them my copy and lending them my photocopied copy that I made months ago so I didn't have to get my shiny book messed up hauling it around to games?

It is not a crime to lend them a CD.  It IS a crime to burn it and give it away.  Same with VHS or anything else.

Same question. Especially since even though, ever since this whole 'not buying the cd, buying the privilege of listening' bullshit started, anyone even trying the offer to have a broken/lost cd replaced has to jump through hoops just to be denied, much less actually served as claimed.

It does not matter if YOU think the law is unjust, it is still the law and you are a criminal if you break it.

Those should be two very distinct ideas, with one being entirely false. Otherwise we may as well start appointing kings again.

My view and the view of every individual should matter, instead of just the view of the corporations, as it is now. America is hard pressed to even present itself as a republic any more, and this is one of the many great examples of that.

But yes, laws are laws, and it is 'criminal' to break even an unjust one.

It is also the duty of all free minded people to break any and all unjust laws.

I make a choice to break laws intentionally that I do not agree with, but I am aware that my actions are illegal.  It just depends on how honest you are with yourself.

I'm entirely honest with myself. I know that certain things which the government should have no right to control are technically illegal. But it's not ever going to stop me from doing what I do, nor will I accept the punishments for said actions.

If I was to murder someone, no matter what the reason, I would acknowledge the crime and accept the punishment, because that is a just law I have broken.

I will never acknowledge nor accept petty laws such as these anti-piracy issues any more than I would pay a ticket for jay walking.

I would however take responsibility for and accept the consequences of not adhering to those punishments, however.

Sirperry

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Pbbbbth !
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #48 on: July 30, 2008, 06:57:00 PM »
Where is the distinction ?  Ask a lawyer.  And when in doubt, you can assume that it is illegal :-)

[/QUOTE]
It does not matter if YOU think the law is unjust, it is still the law and you are a criminal if you break it.

Those should be two very distinct ideas, with one being entirely false. Otherwise we may as well start appointing kings again.[Quote/]

What they SHOULD be is irrelevant.  Here in the real world your ideas (and mine) don't matter except in that they weigh ever so slightly in the public opinion, which weighs in ever so slightly in lawmaking.

[/QUOTE]It is also the duty of all free minded people to break any and all unjust laws.[Quote/] 
That sounds like anarchy my friend.  Breaking laws just to be breaking them is, IMHO, stupid.  Breaking laws on occasion is fine, if you are aware of and have thought out the consequences and are willing to live with them.  Remember, the more often you break laws, the more likely you will get caught.

Refusing to accept responsibility for you actions is childish and immature.  Jay walking is usually harmless where I live.  However, when there is heavy traffic it is dangerous and an impediment to traffic that puts other people at risk.  When it is okay and when it is not is entirely a matter of judgment.  Refusing to pay a jaywalking ticket is, in effect, saying that your judgement is superior to the police officer who ticketed you.  That is not taking a stand for your beliefs, it is childish, akin to saying 'did too!' or 'did not!'

I hope I did not offend, as that was not my intent. 
I just feel very strongly about the issue of taking responsibility for ones own actions.

EDIT:  Hmm, quotes didn't work.  Oh well.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2008, 06:58:57 PM by Sirperry »
There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #49 on: July 30, 2008, 07:28:10 PM »
Where is the distinction ?  Ask a lawyer.  And when in doubt, you can assume that it is illegal :-)

I'd rather assume it is legal unless I am sure or have been told it's not. After all, assuming the reverse leads me to thinking it's illegal to walk backwards while whistling the national anthem.

What they SHOULD be is irrelevant.

Never the case.

Here in the real world your ideas (and mine) don't matter except in that they weigh ever so slightly in the public opinion, which weighs in ever so slightly in lawmaking.

Then there must be a change. First through votes, then through demonstrations if that continues to fail, and if we're still on the road, politically and socially, that we are now in 50-100 years, most likely violence. Everything breaks eventually, and our system is intended to stave that off by listening to the people. Not ignoring them and catering to business interest.

That sounds like anarchy my friend.  Breaking laws just to be breaking them is, IMHO, stupid.  Breaking laws on occasion is fine, if you are aware of and have thought out the consequences and are willing to live with them.  Remember, the more often you break laws, the more likely you will get caught.

Breaking laws just to say "Ha! I break da law!" is indeed quite stupid, but the second part, thoughtful, aware law breaking, as a right and duty, is what I advocate.

And a little anarchy is a good thing. As long as you keep in mind the golden rule.

Refusing to accept responsibility for you actions is childish and immature.  Jay walking is usually harmless where I live.  However, when there is heavy traffic it is dangerous and an impediment to traffic that puts other people at risk.  When it is okay and when it is not is entirely a matter of judgment.  Refusing to pay a jaywalking ticket is, in effect, saying that your judgement is superior to the police officer who ticketed you.  That is not taking a stand for your beliefs, it is childish, akin to saying 'did too!' or 'did not!'

I would gladly accept a ticket for obstructing traffic if I jay walked through a busy intersection. And I would gladly pay all the fines and serve any time associated with not paying a ticket specifically for crossing the street in the wrong location, no matter the time. But I would never pay that ticket.

Just as I would not accept a ticket for driving in a blue car if that was made illegal tomorrow, but I would accept the ticket for speeding, even if the car I was in was blue.

I hope I did not offend, as that was not my intent. 
I just feel very strongly about the issue of taking responsibility for ones own actions.

No offense. I feel very strongly that responsibility must be taken as well.

I just also happen to believe that imposed consequences should not be acknowledged if the reason for their imposing is absurd. I would refuse to serve jail time for eating a peanut butter and mayo sandwhich left handed on a tuesday, regardless of what laws were passed in regard to such.

These anti-piracy issues are the same, as is jay walking when it's not causing anything else that's punishable anyway.

Now... Where I distributing in mass and able to be shown as having an impact on sales of that product personally, through my own actions, that would be entirely different, and I fully agree that mass retailers of pirated and leaked information should be shut down, and if I was running an organization that shipped off thousands of pirated copies a day and was caught, I'd accept those consequences myself.

That is not anywhere near the same as swapping and sharing among friends and associates, though.

It's the difference, to me, between spitting on someone and water boarding them.

Kuroimaken

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 6733
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #50 on: July 30, 2008, 07:43:32 PM »
Quote
EDIT:  Hmm, quotes didn't work.  Oh well.

Cut the slash before on the first bracket, and place the slash before the word on the second bracket, that should do it.

Quote
So where is the distinction in me lending them my copy and lending them my photocopied copy that I made months ago so I didn't have to get my shiny book messed up hauling it around to games?

Technically, there is no distinction there. What you did was the book equivalent of a backup, which is something you are legally able to do anyway (you just can't place it on a torrent or a p2p community or stuff like that). Either way, personal use of anything with intellectual properties does not constitute a crime (at least where I live). Photocopying for personal use (i.e. so your book isn't messed up) and lending someone said photocopy (i.e. temporarily transfering ownership of your backup) still fall within the definition of personal use. However, making several copies of the same book and selling or giving them away (i.e. permanently transferring ownership) is, technically, illegal, even though it shouldn't really be -- because it's not the exact same product you paid for, it's a crude copy. Also, it's not like the big companies care about the small-time distribution anyway; one or two 'freeloaders' isn't a problem. Several hundred or several thousand of them, however, makes for a nasty dent in their wallets.

Quote
What they SHOULD be is irrelevant.  Here in the real world your ideas (and mine) don't matter except in that they weigh ever so slightly in the public opinion, which weighs in ever so slightly in lawmaking.

Actually? It's not irrelevant. There ARE several laws out there that are specifically made to screw with someone, which ranges from the consumer to the small-time marketers. This is the result of lobbyist activity working hand-in-hand with lawmakers -- that, when the lawmakers themselves aren't out to protect their own interests, as is often the case. In any event, laws are mutable and are supposed to accompany the changes in time. A justice system that fails to do so is nothing short of inadequate.

Quote
It is also the duty of all free minded people to break any and all unjust laws.

Do not mistake duty for a choice. While it is a choice they would gladly make, it is not in any way obligatory for them to do so, free-minded or not (otherwise, you're creating a law. Funny how the base theories of law school work, huh?). That said, unjust laws should have no place. The law is supposed to be a problem solver for extreme situations, not an instrument of intimidation or a containment system. It's supposed to be the sword-arm of justice to guarantee the basic rights of everyone, which includes both the consumer AND the industry. That said, it HAS been twisted horribly and out of proportion, but if anything, no man-made system is ever perfect.

Quote
That sounds like anarchy my friend.

Wrong. Anarchy assumes everyone is free to do as they will as long as they do not invade someone else's space. Anarchy assumes the people are their own regulating mechanism and peer disapproval is what would keep crime in check. That said, anarchy is often faced as a bad thing because of the radicals who advocate it just as much as the people who bash the governments incessantly. There is no such thing as a perfect, man-made system. It just doesn't happen.

Quote
Refusing to accept responsibility for you actions is childish and immature.
Agreed. However, refusing to accept undue punishment for them is not so. Responsability is a direct derivative of choice; punishment is a direct derivative of restraint -- imposed by others most often, no less. They ARE very different, and should not be regarded as one and the same. And finally, there is the principle of culpability to take into account. If you can't be blamed for what you did, you can't be punished for it. Simple as that.
Gendou Ikari is basically Gregory House in Kaminashades. This is FACT.

For proof, look here:

http://www.layoutjelly.com/image_27/gendo_ikari/

[SPOILER]
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Katana of Enlightenment.
Get yours.[/SPOILER]

I HAVE BROKEN THE 69 INTERNETS BARRIER!


EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #51 on: July 30, 2008, 07:51:49 PM »
Kuroimaken... Have my babies, please?  :love

Quote
It is also the duty of all free minded people to break any and all unjust laws.

Do not mistake duty for a choice. While it is a choice they would gladly make, it is not in any way obligatory for them to do so, free-minded or not (otherwise, you're creating a law. Funny how the base theories of law school work, huh?). That said, unjust laws should have no place.

Though on this I meant morally, not legally, which, in my opinion, it is. Responsibility, perhaps, would have been a better choice of words?

But I do think all should be free to shirk it, if that is their choice.

Sirperry

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Pbbbbth !
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #52 on: July 30, 2008, 09:18:37 PM »
Ejo, lets not be silly.  We were talking about gray areas of copyright.  When in doubt, it is probably illegal is the safe assumption.

You are absolutely correct, what things SHOULD be should never be irrelevant.  But it is when it comes to the law.

You said 'Then there must be a change'.  Correct.  But I doubt it will come about due to piracy.

I think we agree on when it is appropriate to break the law, we were merely quibbling over the semantics.

You say you would accept fines and even jail time for failing to pay a ticket but would not pay the ticket itself if the ticket was for obstructing traffic.  It seems to me that in that instance, the ticket is justified.  If, on the other hand, you were ticketed for crossing an empty street, it would be unjustified.  Refusing to pay in the second example makes sense, but not in the first example.  In my opinion, anyway.

When it comes to piracy, the record industry is of the opinion that when you share with friends, it reduces the chance that those friends will buy that particular CD, thus reducing their income directly.  You disagree.  And again, I say it is a judgement call where there is no black and white answer. But the law is black and white.  Therefore it is illegal.  Not wrong, necessarily, but illegal.

Kuro, Thanks for the advice.  As I am out of time now, I will continue this later.  Cheers !
There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

EjoThims

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1945
  • The Ferret
    • Email
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #53 on: July 30, 2008, 09:50:15 PM »
Ejo, lets not be silly.

I'm not sure of any other way to be.  ;)

I think we agree on when it is appropriate to break the law, we were merely quibbling over the semantics.

Could be. But I've needed this time sink as a break from packing.  :D

You say you would accept fines and even jail time for failing to pay a ticket but would not pay the ticket itself if the ticket was for obstructing traffic.  It seems to me that in that instance, the ticket is justified.  If, on the other hand, you were ticketed for crossing an empty street, it would be unjustified.  Refusing to pay in the second example makes sense, but not in the first example.  In my opinion, anyway.

I meant that I would accept the ticket for obstructing traffic, but not for just simply jay-walking, regardless of what else I was doing, just as I would accept a ticking for speeding, but not for just driving a blue car, even if I was speeding at the time.

Not wrong, necessarily, but illegal.

Ah, see, from your first post, it seemed to be that you thought it was wrong, even though you do it yourself on occasion.

Thus my attempts to distinguish and split hairs over our otherwise similar approaches, as I very much agree with your last statement, but very much disagree with what I thought you were saying.

 :love

altpersona

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • BG forum Emperor Ad Litem
    • Altpersona.net
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #54 on: July 31, 2008, 02:43:17 AM »
"an unjust law is no law at all"...

is it time to bring up jurisdiction and that sorta thing or is that for the next page?

seems aruba's laws are different than US laws and on and on..

or hows about

and i'll paraphrase cause i'l screw it up if i directly qoute..

the US constitution says something to the effect that anything not already covered is the states problem..

then the congress passes a new law over reaching the constitutions boundaries invading states rights and prohibiting things...

followed by the states passing laws directly allowing those same things...

----------

point being a net forum about childish games is no place for legal debate.

the internet is for bitching about movies and looking at crazy sex stuff you will never see irl.

 
The goal of power is power. - idk
We are not descended from fearful men. - Murrow

The Final Countdown is now stuck in your head.

Anim-manga sux.


Kuroimaken

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 6733
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #55 on: July 31, 2008, 05:17:12 AM »
Quote
Kuroimaken... Have my babies, please?

I make it my policy not to have anyone's babies over the internet, partly due to physical impossibility, and partly because I'm afraid of them catching viruses. I am flattered, though, and would gladly school them for you.  :)

Quote
You are absolutely correct, what things SHOULD be should never be irrelevant.  But it is when it comes to the law.

This is at least partially untrue. Contrary to popular belief, the duty of a judge is not to "interpret" the law, but rather ensure that its spirit be followed. There is a common legal principle known as "in dubio pro reo" that states that, when in doubt, the defendant should be favored, lest the innocent be convicted. This same principle is applied in US law, I believe, only it's called 'reasonable doubt'. However, what is commonly forgotten is that this principle applies to the laws as much as they apply to the defendant. When in doubt about how the law itself should work, the ruling should favor the defendant. (Of course, this gets more complex when we're talking about civil process, I.E. two sides who want the same thing and can't both have it.) While it is not within the power of a judge to actually change a law, he CAN rule in favor of the defendant even when he did break said rule -- which is why we have judges and not machines running courts.

All that ranted, though, it is very sad that a lot of people forget the spirit of the law and are bound by the letter.

Quote
You said 'Then there must be a change'.  Correct.  But I doubt it will come about due to piracy.

It already has. The law itself has been making tremendous progress when it comes to dealing with internet crime (though it is NOWHERE near perfect), the major labels themselves are inescapably surrendering to a digital sales format (the iTunes being the easiest example to point at), and the RIAA is getting less and less convictions when suing people nowadays. Custom changes the law, plain and simple. Usually, such change comes about as a result of the law itself being impractical, of it being impossible to actually enforce said law, or even from people simply not adhering to it.

Quote
"an unjust law is no law at all"...

is it time to bring up jurisdiction and that sorta thing or is that for the next page?

We might as well.

Quote
the US constitution says something to the effect that anything not already covered is the states problem..

then the congress passes a new law over reaching the constitutions boundaries invading states rights and prohibiting things...

followed by the states passing laws directly allowing those same things...

This I'll admit to not falling very close to my area of expertise, but generally it works more or less like this.

Laws, as you may have guessed, have a hierarchy. Highest amongst all laws is the Constitution of a country, which sets the most basic principles upon which all laws are supposed to be based. This includes but isn't limited to the right to live, right to private property, and so on and forth. Generally, after that, you have different law systems for each different aspect requiring ruling (taxes, contracts, and so on and forth). Then, AFTER that, you have state laws, and possibly town laws after that (which work to determine things such as how much money to direct to each department, what is the ceiling for public servant salaries, etc.). As a general rule, intellectual property laws should be ranked right beneath the constitution. One thing worthy of note is that some subjects have law codes of their own, the contents of which supercede any particular, more general rule that may reach into the same situation.

HOWEVER, at least where I live, state laws simply cannot have that kind of power. Something I'm sure is entirely different in the US, where there are different punishments for different crimes (particularly in the case of the death penalty, which is a possible punishment in some states and in others is not).

Last I checked, there wasn't yet an unified movement towards sorting out copyright laws across the globe. As it stands now, each author/owner of intellectual property is only covered by the laws of his own country. Cross the border and he's screwed.
Gendou Ikari is basically Gregory House in Kaminashades. This is FACT.

For proof, look here:

http://www.layoutjelly.com/image_27/gendo_ikari/

[SPOILER]
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Katana of Enlightenment.
Get yours.[/SPOILER]

I HAVE BROKEN THE 69 INTERNETS BARRIER!


Kuroimaken

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 6733
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #56 on: July 31, 2008, 05:23:35 AM »
Quote
point being a net forum about childish games is no place for legal debate.

the internet is for bitching about movies and looking at crazy sex stuff you will never see irl.

Normally I would find it a bit insulting that RPGs be considered childish games, but considering the particular sub-forum we're posting in right now, I'm not too troubled about it.

As for what the internet is for... well it WAS born as a military communications system, but nowadays it's just the best place to leech pr0n.
Gendou Ikari is basically Gregory House in Kaminashades. This is FACT.

For proof, look here:

http://www.layoutjelly.com/image_27/gendo_ikari/

[SPOILER]
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Katana of Enlightenment.
Get yours.[/SPOILER]

I HAVE BROKEN THE 69 INTERNETS BARRIER!


Caelic

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 979
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #57 on: July 31, 2008, 05:29:36 AM »
As someone who actually writes books, I have to come down firmly on the side of IP rights.  A couple of people have argued that information is overpriced; I would suggest that they try sinking in the man-hours it takes to write a book.  Given royalty rates in the oh-so-profitable world of tabletop gaming, I typically wind up making about a third of what I'd make working at McDonald's on a per-hour basis.

That's assuming people actually buy the book, rather than downloading it.  If you don't like my writing, that's fine; don't read it.  Please, though, don't declare that it's good enough to download for free, but not good enough to buy.  And please, please, PLEASE, don't try to tell me that you're doing me a favor by doing so because "It raises awareness of the product."


Kuroimaken

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 6733
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #58 on: July 31, 2008, 07:48:39 AM »
Quote
As someone who actually writes books, I have to come down firmly on the side of IP rights.  A couple of people have argued that information is overpriced; I would suggest that they try sinking in the man-hours it takes to write a book.  Given royalty rates in the oh-so-profitable world of tabletop gaming, I typically wind up making about a third of what I'd make working at McDonald's on a per-hour basis.

That's assuming people actually buy the book, rather than downloading it.  If you don't like my writing, that's fine; don't read it.  Please, though, don't declare that it's good enough to download for free, but not good enough to buy.  And please, please, PLEASE, don't try to tell me that you're doing me a favor by doing so because "It raises awareness of the product."

You raise a very good and valid point, Caelic. I'm sure you are aware how often one-sided such discussions are, and it's great to see your side of the story too.

That said, it's not the actual IP rights I have a gripe about. It's the shady business practices of the publishing companies. I find it very sad that, because "we're losing money" isn't as convincing an argument as "you guys are crippling the author's source of income", that the companies use IP as a flag to make their point. This results in IP rights being actively attacked by people justifying themselves for their actions.

As for "raising awareness of the product", how does THAT even work? Something tells me people don't become aware of books when someone else downloads a PDF. I was scarcely aware White Wolf published anything beyond WoD myself until a couple of months back, for example -- I learned about it by going to the local bookstore and spotting one of their products (Scion, specifically), which I downloaded later for evaluation purposes, and then bought the book. Theoretically, that's how it should go at best, don't you agree?
Gendou Ikari is basically Gregory House in Kaminashades. This is FACT.

For proof, look here:

http://www.layoutjelly.com/image_27/gendo_ikari/

[SPOILER]
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Katana of Enlightenment.
Get yours.[/SPOILER]

I HAVE BROKEN THE 69 INTERNETS BARRIER!


altpersona

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • BG forum Emperor Ad Litem
    • Altpersona.net
Re: So, about book piracy.
« Reply #59 on: July 31, 2008, 08:20:26 AM »
As someone who actually writes books, I have to come down firmly on the side of IP rights.  A couple of people have argued that information is overpriced; I would suggest that they try sinking in the man-hours it takes to write a book.  Given royalty rates in the oh-so-profitable world of tabletop gaming, I typically wind up making about a third of what I'd make working at McDonald's on a per-hour basis.

That's assuming people actually buy the book, rather than downloading it.  If you don't like my writing, that's fine; don't read it.  Please, though, don't declare that it's good enough to download for free, but not good enough to buy.  And please, please, PLEASE, don't try to tell me that you're doing me a favor by doing so because "It raises awareness of the product."



Quote
point being a net forum about childish games is no place for legal debate.

the internet is for bitching about movies and looking at crazy sex stuff you will never see irl.

Normally I would find it a bit insulting that RPGs be considered childish games, but considering the particular sub-forum we're posting in right now, I'm not too troubled about it.

As for what the internet is for... well it WAS born as a military communications system, but nowadays it's just the best place to leech pr0n.


that military net was just the shell for the creature inside...

the game is labeled for ages 8 and up if i recall correctly... i'll not comment on being in my mid thirties...

i wont rant on IP rights.. i will just repeat a commonly used misconception... with rights comes responsibilities... the right of ip balanced against the responsibility of quality.

i minor rant on IP...

[spoiler]so, joe mcauther gives his manuscript to his publisher, his publisher likes it and prints it. it goes to the distributor and to the book stores.. joe recieves a few copies of the final product.. keeps some, gives some to his peeps.. the publisher sends a few copies to reviewers, and maybe to his mother who likes joes work...

joe and the publisher have ripped off the retailers who are actually trying to sell the product.. joe has been paid.. the publisher has also.. and the distributor.. the only group unpaid is the retailer who have to mark up the price incase joe has lost his touch and they cant sell the books... its the risk of retail...

joe gave one of the copies to his newphew bill... bill isnt a big fan of joes work... bill takes the book to the flea market and sells the unopened hot off the presses book two weeks before it hits the retailers for a dollar..

now, bill and joe had no agreement in place about that situation coming up... for all joe knows bill loves his books.. and its not harry potter anyway... just dime store detectives or something..

bill made the buck the retailer who paid a distributor who paid the publisher who paid the author was trying to make.. but bill has commited no crime.. he just made a buck off some one elses labor and ip and even off of someone elses money..

now, bill has a neighbor bob, bob likes joes work, but bob works him self at McJob and cant afford the cover price of a new book.. retail.. and bob didnt know bill had the hook up with joe.. so joe having a free internet connection thanks to the city he lives in providing wifi... he downloads joes book, on pdf... the thought police are onto bob.. he has gotten onto there radar.. they swoop in, kick in his door, trash his house looking for evidence and seize his pc and the psp he got for xmas.. and arrest him. they go to trial , months of legal fees, bob has a job so he dosnt get a public defender.. he has to out of pocket it.. guilty say his 'peers' and time served says the judge plus damages.. how many digits in damages? more than the buck bill got for the copy he sold..

so after all is said and done..

joe get paid to write a book, he gave unpaid for copies away for free.
the publisher got paid to print a book, and gave unpaid for copies away for free.
the distributor got paid to supply a book
the retailer marked the price of the book up several hundred percent and tried like hell to sell the book..
bill got a legal free copy of the book, and made a legal buck off it..
bob got an illegal e-copy of the book (no tree's were hurt by bobs copy) and paid thousands of dollars he didnt have in legal fees and fines and has a criminal record just so he could read a book that he could have also read for free via his local library...

yip, its over stated and slightly unrealistic. but, its how the thing works.. 

[/spoiler]

copyright is about the 'right' to profit from you work.. hail hail hallelujah.. im down with that.. but..
when we move away from profits. when no one is making any money. then thats a different ball game.


also, what do you write? / have you written? lemme see.. please..

The goal of power is power. - idk
We are not descended from fearful men. - Murrow

The Final Countdown is now stuck in your head.

Anim-manga sux.