Mike, yeah I got that, and that is why I didn't quote the first part of your post...I quoted the last part...the part that had to do with me.

But forget it, if you cannot admit that what you said (about me and my Soldiers...not the first line about Ken)was even a tad uncalled for then there is no making you see what you refuse to see.

Thinking about our braves in a foreign land, wanting to send books to them, is a bad thing, sig?

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Buddha

...and since it is so easy, then everyone should do it!...said it was ok, so go ahead.

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Buddha

Sure, but it's so easy to fall in love...

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?

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.

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?

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.)

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?

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?

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.

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?

It's not even that I mind paying for the books, it's just that they don't exist. Plus (whining tone), virtually everyone in the world but me may do it... Differences in copyright laws might have made sense in the past, but with the internet the system is becoming incoherent.

Too true!

There are a lot of things going on with the internet which I disapprove of -- so I don't participate. On the other hand, there are so many laws on the books in various countries that have been out-moded for years -- if not centuries.

There should be a moratorium placed on making new laws until all the old, stupid, and obsolete laws have been repealed.

For example, when my wife and I tried to buy a sail boat, we discovered that there was a more than two hundred year old law which forbid a "non-citizen" to buy and own a sail boat in the United States. (My wife was Canadian.) So the boat had to be in my name only -- although she was required to "co-sign" for the making of payments.

The loast I heard -- back in the early Seventies -- there were aroung fifteen MILLION Federal laws in this country.

It's long past time to start eliminating the useless and destructive ones.

Ken V.

The bottom line is that the difference between giving away a book that you have bought, and uploading a scanned copy of that book is a clear violation of the copyright laws! The book was printed with the knowledge and permission of the author, the E-book was NOT! Technically, just possessing an E-book that is not authorized by the author would be copyright infringement, like possessing, or giving away a DVD movie that was videotaped with a camcorder in the movie theatre! It's illegal, and you can be held liable for it! And if you think that there is NO way that someone can find out that YOU are doing something like this, think again! Big Brother is alive and healthy here in the good old U. S. of A!!!
And that's all I have to say about that!
Lexator

This right here.

When an author has a book published, he/she knows that copies will be read by people who borrow them from libraries, friends, relatives, or find them abandoned in airports, laundromats...whatever. One purchased copy is all the compensation they can expect with regard to all that borrowing. That's the way it works and authors know it.

Any author who authorizes e-copies should be prepared for the "borrowing" (downloading) to increase dramatically over physical books. That's the way file sharing works.

Any author who does not authroize e-copies of work still under copyright has a legitimate complaint if his/her work turns up in electronic format somewhere.

This right here.

When an author has a book published, he/she knows that copies will be read by people who borrow them from libraries, friends, relatives, or find them abandoned in airports, laundromats...whatever. One purchased copy is all the compensation they can expect with regard to all that borrowing. That's the way it works and authors know it.

Any author who authorizes e-copies should be prepared for the "borrowing" (downloading) to increase dramatically over physical books. That's the way file sharing works.

Any author who does not authroize e-copies of work still under copyright has a legitimate complaint if his/her work turns up in electronic format somewhere.

Bones: please read Webby's post caaaaaaaarefully.

Paragraph one is use of FPW's Intellectual property through borrowing a friend's copy or a library copy...while you have it, the other party DOES NOT .

Paragraph 3 is NOT borrowing because the original creator of the e-copy has his copy AND the person he gave an e-copy to ALSO has a permanent copy.

-Wapitikev

I - I still think that, when legal downloads of out-of-print books written by someone who died 60 year ago are available to everyone and anyone in the world BUT the nationals of that writer, there is something wrong. If the books are re-printed, or if I ever find them in a used-books shop, I'll buy them (I prefer the real thing anyway). In the meanwhile, I want to re-read books I enjoyed in my childhood and don't exist anymore.

I agree, it is hard to justify NOT pirating something that is completely unavailable. My sympathies.

II - I buy my DVDs, and I'm punished for it by having to go through that anti-piracy clip before being able to watch them. Unfair for honest people

THIS!

But there is a cure! AnyDVD is a handy little program that will let you re-author a DVD without all the annoying garbage (previews, anti-this, not responsible for that, etc. messages). AND, if you are using it to backup your own DVDs, it is completely legal.

Enjoy!

-Wapitikev

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Buddha

Buddah neglected to mention that the world's supply of common sense is finite...which explains why, as the world's population goes up, less and less of it seems to be available.

-Wapitikev

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?

Since FPW has given his opinion on the topic of the thread, there is no opposing viewpoint to discuss.

-Wapitikev