|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Space Bar wrote: |
By some people's logic here, Amazon and/or the "purchasers" are stealing from these authors. Just how do they get away with it? |
In fact, based geldedgoat's principle regarding the immorality of enjoying an author/musician/etc's work without compensating them, it's actually immoral to enjoy free public domain material despite it's legality! Surely the author's estate would demand compensation if they could after all; they make no demands only because they have no legal basis to. |
Copyright law should protect the creator for the duration of his life and the life of whomever he leaves control to, so on through the ages, in the exact same manner as other physical forms of property. If it's left to no one, it's as good as abandoned to the public. |
I'm sorry, but this simply isn't conducive to a world I want to live in. I think it's best to leave it at that; principles which you seem to take as a priori true, I feel are simply invalid. Your concerns about authors no longer writing aren't convincing to me at all (authors have been writing for thousands of years without any guarantee of payment, and modern life makes writing part time as a hobby or interest incredibly easy), and your suggestion that my indifference to art created purely for profit means that I don't care about art at all leaves me feeling somewhat tired.
We won't agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Space Bar wrote: |
By some people's logic here, Amazon and/or the "purchasers" are stealing from these authors. Just how do they get away with it? |
In fact, based geldedgoat's principle regarding the immorality of enjoying an author/musician/etc's work without compensating them, it's actually immoral to enjoy free public domain material despite it's legality! Surely the author's estate would demand compensation if they could after all; they make no demands only because they have no legal basis to. |
Copyright law should protect the creator for the duration of his life and the life of whomever he leaves control to, so on through the ages, in the exact same manner as other physical forms of property. If it's left to no one, it's as good as abandoned to the public. |
So then you really DO believe that Amazon is stealing from these authors and/or their estates by offering these titles for free?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Space Bar wrote: |
Here are just some books you can get for free from the Amazon store that I found on a single random page:
Every Word (A Free Game for Kindle) by Amazon Digital Services (Kindle Edition - Sept. 15, 2010) - Kindle Active Content
Buy: $0.00
6.
Product Details
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (Kindle Edition - Mar. 1, 1999) - Kindle eBook
Buy: $0.00
8.
Product Details
A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens (Kindle Edition - Dec. 1, 2010) - Kindle eBook
Buy: $0.00
11.
Product Details
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen (Kindle Edition - June 1, 1998) - Kindle eBook
Buy: $0.00
12.
Product Details
Blackjack (Play the Popular Casino Game on Kindle) by Amazon Digital Services (Kindle Edition - Dec. 7, 2010) - Kindle Active Content
Buy: $0.00
By some people's logic here, Amazon and/or the "purchasers" are stealing from these authors. Just how do they get away with it? |
If Amazon compensated the authors/their estates or if some of these books are in the public domain (Dickens and Austen are long dead and copyright is limited) there is nothing wrong in offering them for free.
In fact three of those books are by authors who are long dead and the other two are by what appears to be a branch of Amazon itself.
Hardly a compelling case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| [q. Your concerns about authors no longer writing aren't convincing to me at all (authors have been writing for thousands of years without any guarantee of payment, |
While this is true the selection of books was extremely limited until comparatively recently. And many if not most authors of those times were writing to push a certain agenda or a certain belief. An world in which no one pays for books eventually leads to far less choice even if some authors do keep writing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What about porn? Certainly that isn't art. Certainly its pirated. Certainly the people doing it are doing it for money.
Sure there might be some exhibitionist couple who'd put up their own video, but is that what we the viewer want?
Is porn something society can do without? I think society will always want porn.
Since the performers in porn do it for the money and its part of their livelihood, shouldn't that industry be covered by these protections?
FYI I'm playing a bit of a devil's advocate here. I don't agree with everything I wrote above, but its something to consider.
I will say this, any argument that starts talking about Utopia and "Music should not be about profit" and blah blah blah is just a waste of time.
Deciding what should be done based upon an attempt to envision what Utopia is and should be is a path to destruction.
I believe that the decision here is one that should enable the creation of music as something to be disseminated AND something that can be a career. Now copyright law can be argued both ways on the dissemination part, and the effects of it can be argued for the career part.
The big issue isn't copyright law. The big issue is how does the music industry, musicians, and record manufacturers (those are jobs) transition to the 21st century. While I don't agree with the open anarchy of file sharing in theory (although in practice I support it 100%) I think the record labels are bitterly clinging to the 20th century. Their business model is failing and they are unwilling or incapable of adapting to it in a proper fashion.
This will all work itself out when someone figures out how to make free open file-sharing pay, much in the same way that free open radio and TV have found a way to make themselves pay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| [q. Your concerns about authors no longer writing aren't convincing to me at all (authors have been writing for thousands of years without any guarantee of payment, |
While this is true the selection of books was extremely limited until comparatively recently. And many if not most authors of those times were writing to push a certain agenda or a certain belief. An world in which no one pays for books eventually leads to far less choice even if some authors do keep writing. |
I only see choice as a virtue if there are many things worth choosing. Now, your response is, "Maybe you don't think all those extra books are worth choosing, but other people do." To that I simply say I'm not very content with the notion of giving up my freedom to use things I purchase as I please in order that others have more romance novels to pick from.
If literature must have a business model, why can't it be something more like a subscription service? Technology like Kindles and Nooks allows for the concept of unlimited mobile reading for X dollars a month. Authors can work with individual services to provide monthly releases which advance their storyline, giving their fans quick, convenient access to new releases on a regular basis. In the long run these files would still get shared around, but because they'd be released first and most conveniently in a proprietary format on a mobile device for very little cost per installation, I think many people would still pay isntead of waiting around for a free internet release which they'd have to read on their computer.
Seriously, I'm not overly concerned with author compensation, but if author compensation can be preserved without infringing on our rights to use our purchased products as we wish, how is that not the best compromise between our differing viewpoints? Let's explore this a bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What about porn? |
What about it? The internet is literally flooded with free porn. Anyone who wants free porn can acquire it. None the less, the porn industry (I assume; I don't have any actual statistics) flourishes.
Porn virtually proves my point: free file sharing won't put an end to product creation. Instead, clever entrepreneurs will simply create new business models that accommodate reality.
The current business models are ownership-based: acquire ownership of a given piece of intellectual property (and make no mistake, the people being enriched the most almost invariably are not the creators, but rather those who acquire the rights to the creation), and then deny it to anyone not willing to pay your price.
Business models under my proposed system would be service-based: anyone could hypothetically, if they were willing to wait, experience a given work for free. Businesses would profit not by exploiting exclusive control, but by providing the work to their customers in the most pleasing and convenient format. There's still money to be made, one just needs to do something other than threaten consumers with litigation if they don't compensate you in order to earn it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| [q. Your concerns about authors no longer writing aren't convincing to me at all (authors have been writing for thousands of years without any guarantee of payment, |
While this is true the selection of books was extremely limited until comparatively recently. And many if not most authors of those times were writing to push a certain agenda or a certain belief. An world in which no one pays for books eventually leads to far less choice even if some authors do keep writing. |
I only see choice as a virtue if there are many things worth choosing. Now, your response is, "Maybe you don't think all those extra books are worth choosing, but other people do." To that I simply say I'm not very content with the notion of giving up my freedom to use things I purchase as I please in order that others have more romance novels to pick from.
If literature must have a business model, why can't it be something more like a subscription service? Technology like Kindles and Nooks allows for the concept of unlimited mobile reading for X dollars a month. Authors can work with individual services to provide monthly releases which advance their storyline, giving their fans quick, convenient access to new releases on a regular basis. In the long run these files would still get shared around, but because they'd be released first and most conveniently in a proprietary format on a mobile device for very little cost per installation, I think many people would still pay isntead of waiting around for a free internet release which they'd have to read on their computer.
Seriously, I'm not overly concerned with author compensation, but if author compensation can be preserved without infrin | | | |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
