Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 20:07:09 -0500 (EST) From: PTemple001@aol.com To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg906$foo@default> Subject: Re: Piracy!!! (it's illegal - no matter how you argue)
Before I start this diatribe, please note this is not a personal attack on
anyone in particular, including poor old Dave who's mail is replied to here.
It is a personal attack on anyone who reads the mail, knows it applies to
them but who then continues their antisocial behaviour.!!!!!!!!!!! And no I
don't mention plants until the last 5 lines.
Comments on Law relate to UK Law but I'm certain most countries have some
similar laws if not all and if not identical. And for "books", read "media".
>Hmm... Considering that the public owns what is in a library,
Oh no it doesn't (apologies to people who hate pantomime!)!!!!
The Public own the building theoretically and their taxes pay for the authors
to supply the books on a licensed basis. Every time a book is removed, a
record is kept and at the end of the financial year, a royalty is paid by the
Library (on behalf of borrowers) to the author (why else would he/she agree
to this - does he/she want to spend months of hard work just to give it away?
How altruistic but I don't see many non-artists doing it so why should
authors/artists?). In that way, the author is a little less concerned that
one book is sold to a library for thousands to read rather than selling
thousands of books to thousands of people - the original intention. The
author retains the copyright which is managed on his/her behalf by the
publisher until the contract period expires (usually a set number of years
after the last printing) after which the copyright returns to the control of
the author.
>why on Earth would it be illegal to make a copy, that will not be used to
>make profit by showing it, of what you already own?
Because the reader is making the personal profit (if not, why choose to copy
and not buy - gotcha!!!) at a loss to the publisher and author. The Library
is allowed to buy a book for lending purposes on the basis that it will not
sanction copying. It assumes that a good book that is required repeatedly by
a single reader will either be bought, or it will be borrowed from the
Library repeatedly, in either case giving both author and publisher
royalties. By copying the book (by book, I mean any form of media loaned by
a Library) you subvert the agreement and less royalties are paid despite the
author's agreement to let the library loan out the book. The reader
obviously profits by getting a free or very cheap book (and incidentally,
most people think the photostatted version is cheap but IT IS NOT. It's only
cheap because everyone I know who photostats books uses their employers
photostat machine to do it, which is straightforward theft!!! Meanwhile, OK,
videos, records, cassettes, etc. really are cheap to copy, but that means you
personally are getting a product cheaper than was intended at a direct loss
to all those concerned. (And we all pay more for software, music, etc.
because a percentage of the privce is their to amke up for the theft.)
>You can legally tape the same shows off the tube when they are played by a
TV >station for the profit of said station.
Yes you can. But TV stations largely make their profit through TV
advertisements NOT by selling TV programmes, except when the sell them big
time to networks, syndication (see, I can speak american!!!), etc.. The
programme maker makes a major royalty each reshow (it makes royalties from
potential personal purchases mostly pointless) or they sell the rights for
bigger moneey or a mix of the two. Advertisers aren't interested in
royalties from small sales, they want mass exposure and to sell their
product, not the TV programme. (Ad free public service TV is entirely
different but I'll spare everyone that discussion.)
> BTW, most libraries have photo copying
Yes they do but photostatting a book is still a breach of copyright unless
you stick to very firm guidelines and sign your agreement to not breach
copyright. (And if some countries don't ask for a signature, the book still
has a legal contract in it that the reader is obliged to conform to.) For
example, publishers and authors generally allow bona fide students to
photostat sections of a publication as long as it is not to be retained as a
permanent reference work, sold, or otherwise abuse copyright.
>so you can make copies of the copy righted books and I have not noticed any
legal >hollabalu over that...
With the best will in the world, if anyone tried doing that with any of the
books I wrote and I found out about it they WOULD notice the hullabaloo
because I'd both sue and win. It's illegal. I've forced major apologies out
of peope in the UK who I threatened to sue if they didn't destroy their
illegal copies. Publishers are less willing to accept apologies if they find
anyone illegally copying!!!
Isn't it strange. People just love it when the law protects their property
and rights from being abused. But very few people give a damn about breaking
the law and stealing from musicians (cassete.CD, LP copies), film makers
(video copies), programmers (Computer Programme copying - go on, how many of
you have a copied game or some microsoft software you didn't buy?), and
AUTHORS. Well I make no apologies for being angry that I spend my time
trying to earn a living and I hope that I am seen as putting effort into the
results, but I don't do it so I can watch other people steal the results of
my effort. Neither does anyone else.
Regards
Paul T (Slightly successful - but less so than if people all paid for what
they took!!!)
Author - How to Make square Eggs (Children)
How to grow Weird and Wonderful Plants (Children)
Creepy crawlies (Children)
Enterprise in work (Adults)
Carnivorous plants - A Wisley Handbook (Adult-ish)
(And before anyone asks, only the last one is still in print).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:00 PST