To all you anti-piracy people...
In what way is downloading a free pdf of a book different to borrowing it from a library?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by StarvingAutist
In what way is downloading a free pdf of a book different to borrowing it from a library?
It doesn't cost any money to borrow something from a library...?
It's not piracy if it's genuinely a free book.
But with a library book, you promise to bring it back or pay a fine if you don't.
Could use the same argument with borrowing DVD's from a library against downloading them.
But with a library book, you promise to bring it back or pay a fine if you don't.
Could use the same argument with borrowing DVD's from a library against downloading them.
Original post by SHallowvale
It doesn't cost any money to borrow something from a library...?
Yes, that was my point...?
Original post by ManicMetalhead
It's not piracy if it's genuinely a free book.
But with a library book, you promise to bring it back or pay a fine if you don't.
Could use the same argument with borrowing DVD's from a library against downloading them.
But with a library book, you promise to bring it back or pay a fine if you don't.
Could use the same argument with borrowing DVD's from a library against downloading them.
The fine is so that other people can borrow the book - downloading it doesn't remove its availability to others so there isn't a need for a fine of any sort.
Also, I'm not just talking about legally free books.
You're allowed to give & lend books to other people, so why is downloading them for free a problem? It's similar in principle to using a library.
I guess with illegally downloading a book means that potentially everyone in the world could do it, and therefore no money would go to the author/publisher. At least with borrowing a book, at least one person has to have paid money for it in the first place - chances are there won't be one person buying a book and then sharing it with the world.
Original post by StarvingAutist
Yes, that was my point...?
Sorry, I was kinda having a brain fart.
Original post by SHallowvale
Sorry, I was kinda having a brain fart.
Haha we all have those at times
Original post by Viva Emptiness
I guess with illegally downloading a book means that potentially everyone in the world could do it, and therefore no money would go to the author/publisher. At least with borrowing a book, at least one person has to have paid money for it in the first place - chances are there won't be one person buying a book and then sharing it with the world.
That's true. Though I think it would be a good initiative if publishers took piracy as a lesson and offered a 'pay what you think it's worth' scheme - they could even increase revenues by doing so.
Original post by StarvingAutist
That's true. Though I think it would be a good initiative if publishers took piracy as a lesson and offered a 'pay what you think it's worth' scheme - they could even increase revenues by doing so.
Perhaps, I would much rather legimately pay 1p than download something illegally, just for stupid emotion-reasons. If everyone thought that way they would probably mitigate a lot of losses indeed.
Original post by Viva Emptiness
Perhaps, I would much rather legimately pay 1p than download something illegally, just for stupid emotion-reasons. If everyone thought that way they would probably mitigate a lot of losses indeed.
Well, PWYW is now Wheatus' main method of distribution, and Radiohead experimented with it for a while and apparently it brings in roughly the same income, substantially more if part of the money goes to a charitable cause.
Original post by Viva Emptiness
I guess with illegally downloading a book means that potentially everyone in the world could do it, and therefore no money would go to the author/publisher. At least with borrowing a book, at least one person has to have paid money for it in the first place - chances are there won't be one person buying a book and then sharing it with the world.
I think that's it, it's all about the scale. There's only so many people that can borrow the same library book. Obviously only one can have it at a time. Where as if you share it digitally, one paid for copy can be used simultaneously by millions of people.
I suppose I am anti-piracy (considering my job is making games), but in some cases the ethics of it do get confusing and illogical. The most confusing thing is with TV shows. It's perfectly legal for me to watch a channel 4 show on 4OD with an ad-blocker. I'm getting their content and they're essentially not being paid for it because I'm not seeing the ads, yet it is legal. If I download the same thing with a torrent, it's illegal. Either way they don't make money from me, and actually they lose more if I get it legally from their site without ads because it's using resources that they are paying for.
It gets even weirder if you consider the BBC. It's free and with no ads anyway, so what difference does it make to them if I watch it on iPlayer or through some other "illegal" method? I pay my TV license either way, and you don't even legally require a TV license to use iPlayer.
I cannot count how many times I was disappointed by PC game, book when I bought it without having full access for it to check it out. Also, I cannot count how many times I downloaded stuff, found it very useful and bought the thing because I felt grateful to the person who created the product. Piracy is a filter that separates bull**** from gold. It let's people to access content without paying for it, decide whether it's good or not, and then buy it because they think it is right thing to do. In other words, product that is crap will be downloaded and most likely trashed if it is not useful. No money paid to a person whose effort was not good enough to satisfy the customer. It's fair and it will only leave people who are good at what they do on the market online. Others will be swept out because you either deliver or you don't. And there is not way I would pay to a person who puts his mediocre product out there. Piracy is great. Both creator and customer wins if the product is superb. It raises the standards and improves quality. Look at all the stuff available online: great people offer great products with iron-clad guarantee to give your money back any time if it does not satisfy your needs. Do people abuse this? No! Why? Because the creators are confident their product will make a difference to the customer. Personally, I think that piracy is free advertising for great content: look at the numbers of torrent sites, look at how many people can download your product and try it out. If you managed to feel them awesome when they "stole" your content, the payback will come home to you. People will buy your stuff and you will earn more money. Paradox? No. People want to support great creators and artists, technology people. They are proud to pay and even donate money for the cause that appeals to them. And it is happening. If you force people to always buy stuff, both creator and customer will lose in the long run. Share and care. Piracy is not stealing. It's sharing and paying for the content that made a difference.
If if the content creator has made their work free then it isn't piracy. The library is a public service. They are either given books by the publisher (ie with the content creators permission) or they buy them, and then loan them out for free. However the borrower doesn't own the book.
If the content creator has decided to charge money for their work and then you download it for free without their permission then you have stolen it and it is rightly illegal.
Careers in writing, music and films would be impractical if piracy was legal, and that would be at a huge cost to our culture and intelligence.
If the content creator has decided to charge money for their work and then you download it for free without their permission then you have stolen it and it is rightly illegal.
Careers in writing, music and films would be impractical if piracy was legal, and that would be at a huge cost to our culture and intelligence.
(edited 10 years ago)
Don't pretend there's a moral argument for piracy. Pretty much all of my media is pirated, because it makes sense logically. But morally it is undoubtedly wrong to pirate.
To answer your specific question, the library buys the rights to lend the book out, as well as buying the book itself. So a transaction has taken place and the author has been paid for their effort.
To answer your specific question, the library buys the rights to lend the book out, as well as buying the book itself. So a transaction has taken place and the author has been paid for their effort.
Original post by Valentas
------ Piracy is not stealing. It's sharing and paying for the content that made a difference.
Firstly, please use paragraphs.
I presume you've heard of The Witcher franchise? They removed DRM from their games because it was useless and hassled the consumer, they released a brilliant game, and it was still widely pirated. This has cost them millions.
If you pirate content then you have no respect for the creators or the effort they put into their games. If you want to know if a game is good, watch gameplay videos and reviews on YouTube and decide from there. Don't pirate it and then assume you have the right to not pay for it because the game is ****.
Indie developers also suffer. They are usually small teams who devote a lot of time and effort into making good games. And then people just take the games for free, without realising that people depend on the money from sales.
Imagine you spent $10 Million making a really good game. Would you then be willing for people to play it for free? No, because then you have not recovered the money you spent, nor have you made a profit. Therefore you have no more money to make more games or content (DLC, etc).
Original post by Viva Emptiness
Perhaps, I would much rather legimately pay 1p than download something illegally, just for stupid emotion-reasons. If everyone thought that way they would probably mitigate a lot of losses indeed.
Same, I can see why some people do it, I would prefer to pay £5 for a TV series than £17+, which a lot of companies charge. I just watch nothing as a consequence.
With a library you, or a benefactor, are paying for access to the book. Even at a university library your tuition fees go towards library costs.
I generally refuse to pay for textbooks on the basis that they're ludicrously expensive (I can't afford to splash out £40+ on a textbook I may only use a few times), most of the money goes to the publisher not the author and the authors are generally well paid academics who don't need the money. Most importantly, I disagree with the concept of having to pay anything for access to information required for my studies. I realise that if publishers just made everything free then they'd quickly go out of business, though.
If I read fiction then I'd be more interested in paying for it and supporting the author who most likely relies on income from book sales so they can continue writing full time.
I generally refuse to pay for textbooks on the basis that they're ludicrously expensive (I can't afford to splash out £40+ on a textbook I may only use a few times), most of the money goes to the publisher not the author and the authors are generally well paid academics who don't need the money. Most importantly, I disagree with the concept of having to pay anything for access to information required for my studies. I realise that if publishers just made everything free then they'd quickly go out of business, though.
If I read fiction then I'd be more interested in paying for it and supporting the author who most likely relies on income from book sales so they can continue writing full time.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
