Wapitikev Wrote:It was interesting to a discussion about why the Internet makes copyright legislation obsolete because, once one person breaks copyright, everyone on the planet can blissfully convince themselves that it is OK to own a copy of that something despite the fact that that they didn't pay for that copy.
I thought that this thread already had stated that was the case and was a discussion of why that SHOULD NOT be the case.
In other words, a discussion about B instead of A.
Just becasue you thought that doesnt mean I have to agree with you, does it? How is this going to be a discussion without hearing any opposing viewpoints?
Quote:Neither one told me anything that I did not already know, so I found them neither stimulating nor thought provoking.
So the Internet is a good way for artists who already made millions under the old copyright laws to remain popular and make their money selling out 50,000 seat arenas at $200/seat.
Unless FPW is going to take his RJ series international and start performing the novels live with an interactive laser show, then you are missing the point entirely.
I don't think it's fair to say I'm missing the point entirely, Wapittttkiev.
The majority of stuff I have read about Intellectual Property is to do with music and films, I imagine because the number of people with MP3 players illegally dowloading songs or downloading films to watch on their computers are vast outweighing the number of people who download pdf versions of books. The record labels and film studios who face extinction becasue of the internet are the ones banging on about Intellecutal Property the most, and trying to pressure the government into making laws that protect their out-dated business models.
I think that the same principles apply to books, even though I havent seen much material about that area of copyright infrignement recently.
Quote:Because he made the money directly...he cut out the middle man and thereby didn't have to pay a music company to produce, distribute, publicize, etc....the album. I congratulate him on his success...do you have any numbers on how many have tried this, failed miserably and are now living in squalor?
Like Cory Doctorow pointed out in the boring pointless video I shouldnt have inflicted on you, the internet has made the cost of failure much smaller than before.
I don't have the numbers you require - do you have any numbers on how many people have tried this and enjoyed similar success?
Quote:Did you draw that yourself or did you pirate it?
I pirated it, and that night I slept like a baby! (No, not crying and shitting myself, I mean soundly and with a clean conscience.)
Quote:Yes piracy makes a copy...of the thoughts and concepts that FPW is selling...and those thoughts are illegally obtained through piracy. Your objection to calling piracy theft is semantic and is a poor attempt to distract the discussion from the real issue: Obtaining a copy of the thoughts and concepts that FPW is selling, a copy that you may keep in perpetuity without paying FPW for a copy, is not only illegal, currently and for the foreseeable future, but is expressly against FPW's wishes as stated in this thread.
This also applies to buying a second hand copy of eBay, or borrowing one from the library, something you have already said is fine. So what's your point, mate?
I tried to say this earlier on in this thread, and you shot me down saying it's om to borrow a physical book because
someone paid for it. Well
someone bought the book before they scanned it, so why is this not the same when someone else reads it?
Quote:So you think that FPW's business is failing...why would anyone want copies of his work if that was the case? It is obvious that people want copies for the exact opposite reason.
Your point about improvements and innovations in business strategy are interesting, but are only valid in as much as FPW chooses to apply them to his work...however his work, his intellectual propety, the thoughts and concepts embodied by the words he writes, are what fans should not pirate. They should respect his wishes and pay for a copy of them if they want to have a copy of them.
But what if they don't? Would FPW expect the government to legislate to course correct the market so he doesnt have to bother innovating/improving? Am reading An Enemy of the State, wouldnt that make him kinda like Boedekker?
Quote:Thank you for the time and effort you have spent in an attempt to justify why you should not have to abide by FPW's wishes.
I'm not saying that FPW's business model is failing, I'm sure he's doing very well and until this thread was published I was only vaguely aware that you could download pdf versions of books anyway.
I don't think that illegal pdf versions of books will ever be as big a problem as downloaded mp3s or movies.
Quote:You have yet to make a convincing case.
Anything else you'd like to try and confuse the issue with?
-Wapitikev
Am not trying to confuse anything, just asking questions and trying t find things out. Why the hostility, Wappy? You're normally alright, and I'm not trying to be mean or anything! You're coming off a bit snippy, you ok?