PDA

View Full Version : Is this morally wrong?


Jeff W
06-24-2005, 02:09 AM
I download copyrighted e-books/scanned books to read on my computer. If I wanted to read them otherwise, I would check them out at the library. Regardless of whether or not I check the book out or download it, the publisher will receive no money from me.

Is it morally wrong to read the e-books?

kipin
06-24-2005, 02:14 AM
Information wants to be free.

Patrick del Poker Grande
06-24-2005, 02:15 AM
It's marginally wrong. There's still some sort of convenience factor that you're not paying for. Also, in the case of the library, the book was paid for by the library. You paid for your share of the book through taxes and whatnot. Also, each copy of the book has been paid for and only one person can have acces to it at a time. With the e-book, many copies are made and distributed. There's no limit on how many people can use it at one time and this hurts its earning potential.

Patrick del Poker Grande
06-24-2005, 02:15 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]
This may be true, but if the people who generate and provide the information aren't compensated, there will be nobody to generate and provide it in the future.

squeek12
06-24-2005, 02:16 AM
I do the same and do not feel the least bit guilty about it. However, I do feel that in a small way it is wrong. This is pretty much the exact same deal with music, movies, pern, etc.

FWIW, I enter law school in the fall and have to believe that intellectual property law is a rapidly growing field. Maybe I should get me some of that.

brassnuts
06-24-2005, 02:18 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how much thought goes through the brain to make this statement.

Whenever I download something illegally, I know it's wrong.

liquidboss
06-24-2005, 02:19 AM
No, it's not wrong.

It's almost like how the MPAA likes to say they are losing millions of dollars to internet piracy when most of it is either people downloading movies they would never pay to see or downloading movies they are going to pay to see anyway.

OtisTheMarsupial
06-24-2005, 02:21 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Is it morally wrong to read the e-books?


[/ QUOTE ]

It is if you don't also go buy the book.

kipin
06-24-2005, 02:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how much thought goes through the brain to make this statement.

Whenever I download something illegally, I know it's wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may be interested in reading this.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas_pr.html

ptmusic
06-24-2005, 02:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I do the same and do not feel the least bit guilty about it. However, I do feel that in a small way it is wrong. This is pretty much the exact same deal with music, movies, pern, etc.

FWIW, I enter law school in the fall and have to believe that intellectual property law is a rapidly growing field. Maybe I should get me some of that.

[/ QUOTE ]

First grad school assignment for Law Ethics class: write an essay explaining how one can do something they feel is wrong yet not feel guilty.

-ptmusic

ptmusic
06-24-2005, 02:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I download copyrighted e-books/scanned books to read on my computer. If I wanted to read them otherwise, I would check them out at the library. Regardless of whether or not I check the book out or download it, the publisher will receive no money from me.

Is it morally wrong to read the e-books?

[/ QUOTE ]

Morals are really a personal decision. If the book was illegally scanned or distributed, then I would call that morally wrong. It is not what the author and publisher intended, and out of respect for them I would avoid doing it.

-ptmusic

ptmusic
06-24-2005, 02:28 AM
[ QUOTE ]
No, it's not wrong.

It's almost like how the MPAA likes to say they are losing millions of dollars to internet piracy when most of it is either people downloading movies they would never pay to see or downloading movies they are going to pay to see anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you get your statistics?

-ptmusic

bronzepiglet
06-24-2005, 02:29 AM
I get a little bit iffy about this one... I sometimes "preview" programming books in e-book format. Inevitably I end up buying the good ones used on Amazon or something because it's a pain using it in the e-book format if you want to really read it.

I guess I'm getting a little bit of something I didn't pay for but I honestly think shared e-books have caused me to buy more books. I guess not everybody is like me, though, so I dunno...

Jeff W
06-24-2005, 02:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Morals are really a personal decision. If the book was illegally scanned or distributed, then I would call that morally wrong. It is not what the author and publisher intended, and out of respect for them I would avoid doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let us say you already own the book. Is it still morally wrong to download/read the e-book on your computer?

kipin
06-24-2005, 02:31 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how much thought goes through the brain to make this statement.

Whenever I download something illegally, I know it's wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry I am too tired to really put my statement into my own words, but this fellow pretty much sums up what I want to say.

http://www.jwz.org/doc/iwtbf.html

Like I said I am way to tired to have this discussion, sorry for opening a can of worms and not sticking around to discuss it.

kipin
06-24-2005, 02:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Morals are really a personal decision. If the book was illegally scanned or distributed, then I would call that morally wrong. It is not what the author and publisher intended, and out of respect for them I would avoid doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let us say you already own the book. Is it still morally wrong to download/read the e-book on your computer?

[/ QUOTE ]

How could one even make the case for this being morally wrong? Of course you should be allowed to read the medium in any possible manner, ESPECIALLY if you already own it in one medium..

ptmusic
06-24-2005, 02:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Morals are really a personal decision. If the book was illegally scanned or distributed, then I would call that morally wrong. It is not what the author and publisher intended, and out of respect for them I would avoid doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let us say you already own the book. Is it still morally wrong to download/read the e-book on your computer?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to me. Now here is where hard-core intellectual property advocates may disagree with me.

I guess if the illegal filesharer is somehow profiting from your free download, like with internet banner advertising or something, that might be give me pause; but that's a stretch.

-ptmusic

IcarusFalling
06-24-2005, 02:34 AM
here is how i look at it.. download it and read it because most media sucks anyway... songs etc.. but if you become a fan and believe the book is just awesome.. you should really buy it because this way it is supporting the artists that bring you the coolest things.. most music isnt like this.. all that mainstream garbage i will never buy.. but there are underground artists which i have downloaded in the past(this is how i was introduced to them) and thought they were AMAZING and tottally suport the artist..unfortunatly it seems almost impossible to find the cd in my city /images/graemlins/frown.gif ... but anyway.. if you support it and think it's cool BUY IT ! ! if you have the money ofcourse.. if you are living on $300 a month to survive there isn't much you can do and should look out for yourself

Jeff W
06-24-2005, 02:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
How could one even make the case for this being morally wrong? Of course you should be allowed to read the medium in any possible manner, ESPECIALLY if you already own it in one medium..

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I was asking that question because the poster said that it was morally wrong to own books that are distributed outside the publisher's control.

squeek12
06-24-2005, 02:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I honestly think shared e-books have caused me to buy more books. I guess not everybody is like me, though, so I dunno...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there is something to be said for this. I wasn't much of a recreational reader before I realized that I could get my hands on all kinds of good stuff over the net.

I have bought many times more books in the period after I started downloading ebooks than before. This very well could be a common occurrence.

BTW, any reviews on Crichton's State of Fear? I actually did buy the hardcopy for this one, but haven't started yet. I agree with the book's politics, will I like it?

brassnuts
06-24-2005, 02:37 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how much thought goes through the brain to make this statement.

Whenever I download something illegally, I know it's wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may be interested in reading this.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas_pr.html

[/ QUOTE ]

"Notions of property, value, ownership, and the nature of wealth itself are changing more fundamentally than at any time since the Sumerians first poked cuneiform into wet clay and called it stored grain. Only a very few people are aware of the enormity of this shift, and fewer of them are lawyers or public officials."

I guess it's limited to freethinkers like the author of this article. I only got about a third into it. It was too wordy and didn't make any strong points so I gave up. The argument, as far as I read, was something like, "You can't stop the piracy of digital property so people shouldn't try." They may be correct about efforts to protect digital property being futile, but I don't think we should give up just yet.

brassnuts
06-24-2005, 02:44 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how much thought goes through the brain to make this statement.

Whenever I download something illegally, I know it's wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry I am too tired to really put my statement into my own words, but this fellow pretty much sums up what I want to say.

http://www.jwz.org/doc/iwtbf.html

Like I said I am way to tired to have this discussion, sorry for opening a can of worms and not sticking around to discuss it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much the same argument as the Wired article but much more to the point. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Anyways, like I said, I don't think that just because something is unstoppable, it is correct. That's all I'm saying. Information doesn't want to be free. People want information to be free. But, "Information wants to be free" is more poetic, I'll give you guys that.

YourFoxyGrandma
06-24-2005, 03:16 AM
Just go to the library, you lazy ass.

pryor15
06-24-2005, 03:18 AM
my new rule of thumb: when an OOT post is titled something along the lines of "is this morally wrong?" the answer is invariably "yes" and sometimes "yes, you sick f*ck". in this case, it'd probably lean toward the first one.

TimM
06-24-2005, 03:41 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I only got about a third into it. It was too wordy and didn't make any strong points so I gave up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave up on Wired years ago because I could never finish an article. If I want to read something that can't be done in one sitting on the throne, I'll buy a book.

Jeff W
06-24-2005, 03:42 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I'll buy a book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or download one.

TimM
06-24-2005, 03:53 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll buy a book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or download one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to work that in as a joke, but I really love to buy and own books.

The only e-book I ever downloaded was a Perl reference, and that's much more useful for me in electronic form than book form.

I download music, but never burn it to CDs. If I like it enough to want to listen to it in my car, I buy the CD. I suppose if the Internet existed in its current form when I was a broke college student, I'd have been a less broke college student.

jakethebake
06-24-2005, 08:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Information wants to be free.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently idiocy does too.

Bataglin
06-24-2005, 08:50 AM
Absolutely not.

Patrick del Poker Grande
06-24-2005, 09:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
my new rule of thumb: when an OOT post is titled something along the lines of "is this morally wrong?" the answer is invariably "yes" and sometimes "yes, you sick f*ck". in this case, it'd probably lean toward the first one.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a good rule of thumb. It's probably accurate better than 99% of the time.

Alobar
06-24-2005, 11:15 AM
nothign wrong with this. Whether you go to the library and get it for free, or DL from your underwear at home for free. Same diff. The only way I think you could make a case was if you printed it out and sat it on a bookshelf or something.

Patrick del Poker Grande
06-24-2005, 11:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
nothign wrong with this. Whether you go to the library and get it for free, or DL from your underwear at home for free. Same diff. The only way I think you could make a case was if you printed it out and sat it on a bookshelf or something.

[/ QUOTE ]
What's the difference if it's in his digital collection or his print collection? Why is it wrong if he has it printed out, but all of a sudden it's nothing if he just has it on his computer? He stole it either way.

That's like saying it's alright if you hack into the bank and transfer somebody's money into your bank acount, but if you take it out of the atm as cash, only then does it become wrong.

Alobar
06-24-2005, 11:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nothign wrong with this. Whether you go to the library and get it for free, or DL from your underwear at home for free. Same diff. The only way I think you could make a case was if you printed it out and sat it on a bookshelf or something.

[/ QUOTE ]
What's the difference if it's in his digital collection or his print collection? Why is it wrong if he has it printed out, but all of a sudden it's nothing if he just has it on his computer? He stole it either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, you are right. He should erase it after he's done reading it then.

When I get a book from the library, am I stealing it?

If I have the choice of two options (library, or DL) and in both choices the author or publisher or library or anyone makes even $.01 off it, and when I'm done I release it (return it, or erase it) Then what does it matter which route I go? No one will ever know, and the result is exactly the same. Its kinda like quantum physics, heh.

spamuell
06-24-2005, 11:27 AM
But if everyone downloaded books then libraries wouldn't exist and authors wouldn't receive the money they are paid by the libraries, so it does make a difference.

Books are too expensive though (in the UK).

NiceCatch
06-24-2005, 11:27 AM
[ QUOTE ]
No, it's not wrong.

It's almost like how the MPAA likes to say they are losing millions of dollars to internet piracy when most of it is either people downloading movies they would never pay to see or downloading movies they are going to pay to see anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make sense. If someone downloads a movie, it is because it has some VALUE to him/her. Just because he or she wouldn't pay the full price for the movie, doesn't entitle them to a FREE copy of it. Taking something that you don't want to pay full price for is (by any reasonable definition of the word) STEALING.

The bottom line is, there are people working hard out there to make the music and movies that you listen to and watch, and every time you don't pay for one of their products you are ripping them off.

I don't think there's much gray area here. I think the problem is it's so easy to pirate music and movies, that often as people do it, they're not forced to realize that they're taking money out of the pockets of hard working musicians and actors. I guess it's similar to people gambling away huge sums on internet poker; without the feel of physical chips in their hand, the situation and cosequences are less real to them.

Alobar
06-24-2005, 11:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
But if everyone downloaded books then libraries wouldn't exist and authors wouldn't receive the money they are paid by the libraries, so it does make a difference.

Books are too expensive though (in the UK).

[/ QUOTE ]

thats a valid point I suppose. Im gunna put this waaay waaay low on the list of "stealing" tho. So low in fact, that I wouldnt feel morally wrong about it.

chesspain
06-24-2005, 11:43 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I download copyrighted e-books/scanned books to read on my computer. If I wanted to read them otherwise, I would check them out at the library. Regardless of whether or not I check the book out or download it, the publisher will receive no money from me.

Is it morally wrong to read the e-books?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not unless you think stealing is wrong.

NiceCatch
06-24-2005, 11:44 AM
[ QUOTE ]

You may be interested in reading this.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas_pr.html

[/ QUOTE ]

A thought that struck me as I read the opening TJ quote is that his argument leads to the following conclusion: ideas and intellectual property have no inherent monetary value. Which means the work that people put into creating intellectual property shouldn't (or can't) be compensated.

I'm not really worried about the fact that the production of intellectual property will disappear to nothing... but certainly I would think the quality of it would go down greatly with zero financial incentive. Would you work at your current job if you received no financial compensation? Why is it that you DON'T do what you'd love to do (if it is not what you are currently doing for a living)?

Patrick del Poker Grande
06-24-2005, 12:34 PM
What I do for a living is entirely production of intellectual property. What I supply to a customer is data, models, designs, my opinion, and other things that are of significant value as intellectual property. They pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars at a time for this property. I'm certainly not going to give it to them for free and they'd certainly be upset if someone hacked in and stole it. I sign agreements that I won't disclose any of it to anybody else.

Granted, in my particular line of work this also has potential national security and/or ITAR implications, but in the end, it's essentially the same as music, movies, or literature. This stuff doesn't come for free. We are in an era now where intellectual property is quite significant and we need to come to a better way of controlling it and its communication, just as other forms of property and their transfer were more important in past eras.

turnipmonster
06-24-2005, 01:00 PM
good post, patrick. people should get paid for what they do, whether they're authors, musicians or sciencing rockets.