THE JAMES MASON COMMUNITY BOOK CLUB discussion
Authors and Their Books
>
Why do book buyers feel their rights supercede those of authors and publishers?
date
newest »
newest »
Wait how do they loan it to the person? Cause I don't think it's illegal to give someone something (you can't sell copies of it). I mean that's essentially saying I can't check out a book from the library or else I'm committing a crime. Hell and they even charge you (if it's late).
I can loan a paper book to someone else. Why should it be different with ebooks?
Exactly. I don't know HOW you loan an e-book (although some libraries use it). I personally dislike e-books so I don't use them. For e-books, I can only say: Karma can suck.
You've researched this well, it seems. I recognize it as a problem (in books or music). I know music better: when you give a song you've bought to someone else you are taking money (in theory) away from the musician. That's why some musicians have to tour more now to make a living. The same goes for novelists (like myself).
That said, the world of lending "artistic" works is here. I accept it. Without rancor. No way to predict how it will evolve,and I find that exciting.
Sean
It actually isn't illegal to give people songs. It's illegal to SELL people the music (like you can make a mixed cd as a gift but you can't sell it to someone). And the reason for touring more is due to oeioke illegally downloading the music, not sharing the music. Like a musician wanted people to illegally download his music cause they don't get that much money from people buying songs, it comes with the tours. So even some musicians acknowledged that it wasn't really that big of a deal.
Richard wrote: "It actually isn't illegal to give people songs. It's illegal to SELL people the music (like you can make a mixed cd as a gift but you can't sell it to someone). And the reason for touring more is d..."I've noticed that the warnings on DVDs now say making a copy even where no monetary gain is involved is also illegal.
If they were serious about protecting copyright they'd outlaw copiers. With the creation of ever better and more efficient copying they really need a better system of compensating someone for their work than copyright law, licensing, and royalties.
DVD's are illegal to copy. DVD's aren't meant to be saved onto you're computer, whereas CD's are.
Richard wrote: "It actually isn't illegal to give people songs. It's illegal to SELL people the music (like you can make a mixed cd as a gift but you can't sell it to someone). And the reason for touring more is d..."Actually, the "selling" is incidental If you read the copyright section I cited at the beginning of this, it's the act of copying that's illegal and it applies to ANY copyrighted work, regardless of media used, print, digital, CD, DVD or streaming audio tape. The only exception is making a backup copy for personal use should the original be damaged or destroyed.
Marc wrote: "Richard wrote: "It actually isn't illegal to give people songs. It's illegal to SELL people the music (like you can make a mixed cd as a gift but you can't sell it to someone). And the reason for t..."Richard, aw c'mon make the tool illegal because it was misused? I once covered a homicide in which the victim was bludgeoned to death by her husband using a bowling trophy. Owning a car isn't illegal but driving it unregistered and uninsured is. Should we ban bowling trophies or car ownership?
So you're saying essentially it's illegal to put the songs on your computer? Cause when you do so you are essentially copying it onto your comp, then to your ipod/mp3 player or other musical device. I'm not saying it's write to copy e-books, but from what I understand is people are sharing the e-book with their friends. Doesn't that mean the person temporarily gets it? (and while your friend has it then you don't).
Sorry, I'm not going into a long discussion about the ethics of copying music. I'll let the music companies and song writers handle that. This conversation is getting very weird.
Mod
I've never used the loan feature on my Kindle but I assumed it worked just like a physical loan. That book is no longer available to me - and it is only available to them for a limited time.I checked and that is just the case. They can use the book (and only certain ones are eligible - and that is with the publisher's permission) for 14 days and I would not have access to the book during that period. This isn't a way to hurt copyright. It's much the way real books are borrowed between friends.
Since the publishers have set which books can have the feature and multiple copies aren't being made - I don't see how this violates any laws or ethics.
I didn't mean to offend anyone, I was just confused as to how loaning a book is breaking copyright laws.And that's what I thought it did, Margaret. I don't have an e-reader so I wasn't really sure how the loaning worked, but loaning a book should be a good thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsIzAX...I don't have these problems because I read physical books. I hold them and they feel good in my hand. I like loaning them to friends or buying them used and seeing what others have written in the margins. Friends have always loaned books to one another; and the library is just full of books they paid for once and then loaned to hundreds of people. Call me old fashioned...I'll take it as a complement.
My books are available as ebooks and I don't put DRM on them and I do allow lending. Personally, I want all the exposure I can get. A reader who reads an ebook loaned to them by a friend will hopefully become a fan and buy the next one.Merrill Heath
Novels by Merrill Heath
Ivan wrote: "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsIzAX...I don't have these problems because I read physical books. I hold them and they feel good in my hand. I like loaning them to friends ..."
I don't have an e-reader either, and I really do not want one. Sigh, I might have to get one though, for many of the classic girls' fiction books I love collecting are really, really expensive (vintage books often are, especially popularly collected ones) and some are not even available as paper copies. So I might someday get an e-reader for downloading vintage books from sites like Project Guttenberg.
That being said, I have sometimes loaned paper books (traditional books) to friends and they have done the same for me. Like Ivan, I also buy used books, often discards from libraries. I see nothing wrong with loaning books to friends (especially books that are not all that readily available to purchase or borrow from the library). I am not familiar with the Kindle, but if borrowing/lending a book on the device is possible, and if the author allows for it, then that is completely acceptable, in my opinion. If the author does not allow borrowing/lending, that is another story, but if the author allows it, how is lending/borrowing an e-reader book unethical or criminal?
I think the most important principal is lost in the dust of minute legal argument: authors, musicians, photographers and others with creatively produced products would like to be able to make a reasonable return on their efforts. Writers deserve to be able to support their family while they work, if their work is good enough. It seems that is the challenge confronting us all - how to solve that very basic problem in an age of rapidly developing technology.
As I mentioned previously, if an author makes his/her e-book available for loaning, I don't think it is or should be seen as unethical and illegal (it is a feature and obviously at the author's personal discretion wether his/her book is eligible). It would be an entirely different story, if e-books were lent to others without the author's permission or against the author's specific demands and wishes.. Now, I have another question. Let's say I have a device like a kindle and I lend the entire device to a friend who is traveling or to a friend who wants to check out what reading from an e-book is like. Could that also be considered a potential problem? And I still do not really get how letting a person borrow an e-book title is all that different from letting a person borrow a paper copy of a book. I mean, in both cases, the author does not receive royalties, payment etc. (same as when a person borrows a library book). I am not trying to stir up trouble here, I would just like to know what the difference is.
I have never heard of any one saying that lending your entire device, with all your books on it, is wrong in any way. Risky, maybe. Wrong - no, I don't think so.
My guess about the other question is that lending one real life, dead tree, book is very different from allowing multiple people to get your ereader library through multiple downloading. The latter results in author and publisher losing the opportunity to sell the book to those friends of yours.
My guess about the other question is that lending one real life, dead tree, book is very different from allowing multiple people to get your ereader library through multiple downloading. The latter results in author and publisher losing the opportunity to sell the book to those friends of yours.
I don't know what it comes down to in the law - although I'm curious, but for me I think the ethical line is when a new copy is made. If you lend your e-reader, you haven't changed the quantity of what's out there. You can use it, or your friend can use it, but only one at a time. If you create another copy so you can both have it without royalties happening, that seems to be crossing a line.Anybody remember when Garth Brooks was on a campaign to make it illegal to sell CDs second hand?
Gundula wrote: "As I mentioned previously, if an author makes his/her e-book available for loaning, I don't think it is or should be seen as unethical and illegal (it is a feature and obviously at the author's per..."Oh boy, I'm starting to wish I never posted this info. I wasn't trying to stir up a hornet's nest, just inform. But here goes. While it could possibly be construed as a violation, I doubt anyone would ever pursue any sort of action. In that situation, it's like handing a book to a family member. I certainly wouldn't have a problem with it.
EBooks in any format are a problem because it's so easy for a hacker to borrow a book, hack the code, then churn out pirated copies. I recently saw statistics that say 25 percent of all existing EBooks have already been pirated. It's far less likely to have pirated copies because the thief would either have to go to a legitimate printing company to have the book printed, or build an offset printing plant. Neither option is likely.
Copyright law says any work cannot be copied without the author/publisher's permission. In addition, EBook reader makers also limit the number of times a book can be loaned via a reader. Typically, one loan. For better or worse, under current copyright laws that also prohibits libraries from loaning EBooks as the same law applies. Also, because of cost and potential damage, libraries are unlikely to buy and loan EBook readers to patrons.
Unfortunately, there's a small but vocal group of people who bought devices and either failed to read the purchase agreement or are objecting to being held to their agreements. I currently have two digital books. One has loan approval, the other not.
Unlimited lending not only opens the piracy risk and violates international copyright laws, it also potentially denies the author of potentially sizable royalties.
Stripping the DRM and distributing copies is an act of copyright infringement.
As a professional writer, I write books as a business, not a hobby and expect to be fully paid for my work. If I were looking to spend my time instead with a hobby, it would be model railroading or fishing. Hope that helps and doesn't offend anyone, but that's the situation unless Congress and foreign governments change copyright laws.
Virginia wrote: "The Mises.org website blog area goes nuts on this and rants forever and debates on and on about Intellectual Property rights, copyrighting or patenting them, do they really exist, etc. It IS very ..."I had never heard of them, but since they're based in Alabama, according to a quick check I did of their website, they come under U.S. law, regardless of their feelings. If I was the director, I'd be worried about U.S. Marshals arriving with a search and seizure warrant. Just my view based on what I saw at their site.
Virginia wrote: "Margaret wrote: "I've never used the loan feature on my Kindle but I assumed it worked just like a physical loan. That book is no longer available to me - and it is only available to them for a lim..."You don't have to buy a reader, you can download free software from Amazon and Barnes and Noble that allows you to read Kindle and Nook formats on your desktop or laptop. I have both on my computer. I have no need for a reader, but do love the opportunity to access free out-of-copyright books that are old friends, such as James Fenimore Cooper or Mark Twain, books I haven't read in (egads!) half a century.
Rebecca wrote: "I don't know what it comes down to in the law - although I'm curious, but for me I think the ethical line is when a new copy is made. If you lend your e-reader, you haven't changed the quantity of..."I don't remember that, but illegal software copies have been a thorn in the computer industry's side for decades. Unfortunately, they failed, early on, to properly protect software and likely lost billions of dollars in potential sales. Now, investigates have the right to walk into a business, examine computers and seize any with pirated software. The businesses then face still fines.
Ivan wrote: "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsIzAX...I don't have these problems because I read physical books. I hold them and they feel good in my hand. I like loaning them to friends ..."
Me too, Ivan! I like ink and paper! :) In my copyright statement though, the reader is warned that photocopying my book is illegal. :) I've come across many people who have complete books (including covers) that they've photocopied from their friends' books!!! My goodness!!!
In the end though, none of us can control the world, or the choices that other people make! People are going to break the law if they choose to break the law! After all, your story, your words, are being read! And that's what's important! :)
If we waste our time being angered by the actions of others, we'll get wrinkles sooner than we ought to! :)
C, yes people are going to break the law. But every time an author's book is stolen, he loses money. In a short while he decides its not worth the weeks, months or even years or building a carefully crafted masterpiece if half his royalties go unpaid because of purloined copies. The result, a great writer is lost. Wrinkle worries are what the victim of the literary work theft experiences. Just my take.
Yes this is true.I feel that pain. Let me tell you my story. I'm a writer, ever since I was 7 years old, I knew I wanted to "make my own book" and so in the true sense of that spirit, I have begun to make my own books! :) My first release was last year, my second release this year. I publish my self, because I feel that when I publish myself, I am making my own books! If I don't publish myself, I think I would be "handing over my writings" rather than making my own books. In this light, I have not attempted to be traditionally published (seeking an agent, seeking a publishing company, etc.). So anyway, my first book I published with AuthorHouse, who told me that they handle international authors just fine. What they didn't tell me is that I wouldn't be able to be paid my royalties if I didn't open a UK bank account. Well, unto this day, I have not been able to earn even a single cent from my book! I get the cheques, but I can't do anything with them! I don't live in the UK, and I don't have a UK account outside of the UK and in the country wherein I live I need initially a large sum of GBP to open a Pound account. So, I have just let go of the idea of earning money from my first book, at all! I plan to pull it out of AuthorHouse and publish it elsewhere, and I will do that soon.
The underlying idea here, is, that I know there are many pains involved with being a writer. We often feel unappreciated, we often feel taken advantage of, and we often feel like there are so many people out there that find it so simple and easy to write off our books as a two-star quality creation, meanwhile years of our hearts and minds have gone into those pages. And after people read your masterpiece, they giddily go back to the bookstore and pick up another, ready to write it off in judgement as well!
I think people forget that writers are people. Kind of like how people forget that actors are people. After all, without writers, there would be no actors! No movies! No plots! No Oscars, no film makers! We're all a part of the same trade, in the sense that we are the ribbon that ties these chords together.
There is a certain pain that we can all relate to, and I've been pained, myself.
But the thing is, in the end, at the end of the day, the person that you are going to be with, is yourself, so what do you want that person to be like?
At the end of the day, we owe it to ourselves to let go of things and be happy, and do what we love to do.
CC
Larry wrote: "Gundula wrote: "As I mentioned previously, if an author makes his/her e-book available for loaning, I don't think it is or should be seen as unethical and illegal (it is a feature and obviously at ..."I am glad you started this thread, because it seems we all have some questions. And yes, with e-books I guess it is much easier for someone not only to borrow an e-book, but to hack it or to make a copy of it. I would not have the slightest idea how to do that, but others are likely not as much of a techno-zero than I am.
Let me just say this. "IF" I were a writer and I published e-books, I wouldn't care if one person "shared" my book with a friend (or several friends) - downloading the book from one machine to another. However, I would be very upset if someone pirated my work for their own profit. So, you see, I do agree with Larry.
Ideally, I suppose, books would be treated like songs but they are not. And personally, as the author of 15 traditionally published books, if i had to chose between the two, I'd rather have more readers than more money.
C. wrote: "Yes this is true.I feel that pain. Let me tell you my story. I'm a writer, ever since I was 7 years old, I knew I wanted to "make my own book" and so in the true sense of that spirit, I have begu..."
C, Something is seriously wrong with that situation at Authorhouse. You should be able to deposit those checks in an American account, pay the going exchange rate and get your money in local currency. Suggest you send an email to British authorities at: fraud.alert@met.police.uk
That's New Scotland Yard and the London police are charged with investigating UK fraud. Hope that helps.
Ivan wrote: "Let me just say this. "IF" I were a writer and I published e-books, I wouldn't care if one person "shared" my book with a friend (or several friends) - downloading the book from one machine to ano..."Ivan, thanks. I also have mixed feelings. Most writers want their works read by others, but when it's our method of earning money and protecting intellectual property rights, a line must be drawn. Perhaps it's party the fault of the English language and the phrase "starving artist" that helped contribute to the mindset. In any event, many thanks for the support. Most of my fellow authors appreciate it, as do I.
Larry wrote: "For better or worse, under current copyright laws that also prohibits libraries from loaning EBooks as the same law applies."Nope. Our local library lends eBooks of some titles (ePub format). So do many others, per the article link that follows. The majority of libraries that do so use DRM set up to lock the book out after a certain length of time. If you google "libraries lending eBooks" you will get thousands of hits.
http://wiki.mobileread.com/wiki/EBook...
Just an FYI re: Authorhouse. They (and several other) self-publishing companies do not enjoy a very good reputation. If you are unsure about a company you are considering (or even if you think it sounds pretty good), check them out on this site: Predators and Editors . Of course, you should also ask your industry colleagues (one of the reasons why Goodreads is such a great resource), but this is an outstanding place to begin.
Virginia wrote: "@Larry. The Mises school is an Austrian school of economic philosophy. It is not a "school" ; it is more of a belief system regarding economics and they just like to talk about whether there is r..."Virginia. I know of quite a few people who would likely take issue with the premise of no intellectual property rights. Stephen King, Patterson, virtually every successful author, playwrite and artist. Even as a reputed communist, I suspect Picasso would vehemently object. Let's also not forget clothing and handbag designers. Not only do those rights exist, when measured collectively, they account for a good slice of GDP, gross domestic product.
Sharon wrote: "Larry wrote: "For better or worse, under current copyright laws that also prohibits libraries from loaning EBooks as the same law applies."Nope. Our local library lends eBooks of some titles (eP..."
Sharon wrote: "Larry wrote: "For better or worse, under current copyright laws that also prohibits libraries from loaning EBooks as the same law applies."
Nope. Our local library lends eBooks of some titles (eP..."
Driving may be legal, but if you're in a stolen car you go to jail.
Just found this post on a Library website: http://blog.librarylaw.com/librarylaw...
"May a library lend e-book readers?
(by Peter Hirtle)
A recent post at the Citizen Media Law Project about one’s First Sale rights with e-books got me thinking about libraries. CMLP noted that with e-books, one has no first sale rights because they are usually governed by licenses instead. First sale, however, is fundamental to the business of libraries. It allows us to loan to others copies of printed books we have purchased without violating the copyright owner’s rights to distribute the work. Some libraries have started lending e-book readers to faculty and students, including the Lewis Music Library at MIT and the NCSU Library, which are both loaning iPads. Is this legal?
Lending iPads at NCSU
While a library can buy an iPad device, it is not much use without software, and that software comes with a license. According to the iPad Software Agreement posted at ScribD, Apple owns the software on the iPad you purchased. You are allowed to install that software on a single Apple-branded iPad. You cannot, however, “rent, lease, lend, sell, redistribute, or sublicense the iPad Software.” (emphasis mine)
An argument can be made that lending the physical device is also the loan of the software, which is prohibited by the license. This interpretation is supported by the only explicit exemption to the prohibition against redistribution: namely, your ability to transfer the software to someone else when you transfer ownership of the iPad."
A library lending out EBooks doesn't make it right-only irresponsible. Free Public Libraries are funded by communities. Communities are run by politicians and bureaucrats. Both of which have long track records of performing illegal activities -- at least that's my experience after covering them as a journalist since 1963.
People can express their opinions and point out supporting arguments for the next year without changing the results. According to the U.S. Copyright Office: Uploading or downloading works protected by copyright without the authority of the copyright owner is an infringement of the copyright owner's exclusive rights of reproduction and/or distribution. Anyone found to have infringed a copyrighted work may be liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 for each work infringed and, if willful infringement is proven by the copyright owner, that amount may be increased up to $150,000 for each work infringed.
Larry wrote: "Gundula wrote: "As I mentioned previously, if an author makes his/her e-book available for loaning, I don't think it is or should be seen as unethical and illegal (it is a feature and obviously at ..."woah, i think unlimited lending is a bit too much. as a reader, i'm quite content with the lending as it is --- only once. after all, the authors need to eat too, plus writing a book is no easy task. i personally try out new authors by borrowing ebooks on my kindle. then, if i really like them, i usually buy backlists :)
Virginia wrote: "Any contract a writer would have with an agent or, eventually, the publsiher, would spell out the writers' agreements regarding epublishing as well as conventional. Still, pirating does go on big..."Virginia, from a writer's standpoint that's a really scary thought.
Sean wrote: "You've researched this well, it seems. I recognize it as a problem (in books or music). I know music better: when you give a song you've bought to someone else you are taking money (in theory) ..."
Sean, please, don't accept it. The computer software industry let it slide until there were companies with more pirated software in the marketplace than originals. They lost billions in profits. That's why they now implement anti-piracy protections and prosecute those businesses that use unauthorized copies. By the very nature, writers are solitary creatures. Except for periodicals we work alone, not surrounded by fellow writers that can present a united front. Not only is there a segment of readers who want to pass around EBooks, but we face future concerted effort from the Big 6 because Indie authors finally have a publishing option that doesn't include them. In addition, I've seen unconfirmed reports that at least one publisher is running some sort of "deal" where you can download 25 EBooks for 25-cents. (OMG what a nightmare!)
Larry wrote: "Sean wrote: "You've researched this well, it seems. I recognize it as a problem (in books or music). I know music better: when you give a song you've bought to someone else you are taking money..."
That was 25 cents for each of 25 e-books.
Larry wrote: "Sharon wrote: "Larry wrote: "For better or worse, under current copyright laws that also prohibits libraries from loaning EBooks as the same law applies."Nope. Our local library lends eBooks of ..."
I don't recall where you posted anything about lending eReaders; you argued that it was illegal to lend eBooks. You subsequently posted an article in its entirety (which, BTW, is a violation of Fair Use Doctrine ... although you did provide the source). Pot:kettle? Maybe.
In any event, it's quite apparent to me that the libraries purchase X number of download licenses for the eBooks they lend (not for eReaders) and that the books are DRMed to time out after a certain period. The library has to purchase a new license once the number of downloads is reached. This is hardly illegal, despite your attempts to pretend expertise in the matter. ::shrug::
Larry wrote: "C. wrote: "Yes this is true.I feel that pain. Let me tell you my story. I'm a writer, ever since I was 7 years old, I knew I wanted to "make my own book" and so in the true sense of that spirit, I..."
Thank you for the advice, Larry! :)
For those who still refuse to believe, here's the applicable link to the U.S. Copyright Office: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq...
There's another citation I found that also covers the topic and sheds light on libraries loaning Kindle Books and/or Kindle Readers. It's at: http://librarianatlaw.blogspot.com/20...
In that article it says: "This is not a new issue. Peter Hirtle in the Library Law Blog, raised this issue last June in his post - May a library lend e-book readers? This appears to be an intractable problem that will not be resolved by the market. Instead, unless Amazon relents in its insistence on strict compliance with the terms of the license agreement, a change in law will be required."