posted
I founb some of OSC's work on one of thosedownload sites. There were some of his out of print books that aren't on normal boockstore shelfs, and I just don't have the money to buy them. It is, ethically wrong, and I do download music, but since I'm hear, I owe it to OSC to at leats get a consensus, do you think he would mind if i downloaded a few things?
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
All the more reason to be careful what you download. I'm serious, the FBI has put black-boxes on ISPs recently. Those boxes have the ability to see what ISP requests information, and what consumer of that ISP requested within that ISP's domain. Basically, they are watching every move everybody makes on the internet. It's not as un-watched as it used to be.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know the answer to your question, but it seems like a good place to post a question of my own, since no doubt a Card will read this thread.
I make use of a device called the Molecular Disruptor Device, patterned after the Dr. Device, in one of my short stories. Its purpose in the story is to be your stereotypical (and merely theoretical) doomsday device, while more concrete issues drive the story forward. I intend it to be an homage, just as OSC used the Ansible as an homage to LeGuin. I have seen him write that, in general, this is ok.
Is what I am doing acceptable?
I haven't yet succeeded in selling the story, but partly that's because I start with the top paying markets and work my way down. I'm wondering, though, if editors are seeing my MD Device, believing that I am stealing from Card (and foolish enough to believe nobody will know), and rejecting me for being amateurish. So, a further quesiton is: if this homage is okay, could I make a comment in my cover letter to the effect that I have Card's permission to do this? Or is such a statement not necessary because people will correctly divine my intentions?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
dig through a lot of libraries, moozh. and then search websites that have out of print books. make requests for them to be reprinted! there are not that many osc books i haven't been able to find.
how would you like to go to work and not get paid?? that money supports osc's family and paves the way for more cool projects! please find other avenues and have respect for his work. that is my two cents, anyway. and YES, i download music on kazaa, but i also go out and buy a lot of cds. often i use kazaa to check out artists i haven't heard a lot of.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't necessarily disagree with you Porce, but it's worth noting that OSC doesn't make money from a book being checked out of a library, or from a book being bought used.
In this day and age, I'm not sure why out of print books aren't kept in "print" electronically or in some on-demand sort of way. I know e-books still have a lot of issues to hash out. I suppose that if they existed in this manner, that might lower demand for new editions of the same title, but they're not exactly earning any money while the lie "fallow."
OSC has written in defense of file sharing before, though I'm not certain if it would extend to entire novels. I also doubt he could specifically condone downloads of his published works, because that would likely land him in hot water with his publisher.
But I'm just guessing here.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
i am aware of that, icarus, but at least books in a library/used store were paid for at least once. i, too, prefer having some tangible. i hate reading off the computer, heh. (hatrack is the exception to everything, isn't it?)
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Our library's copy of Enchantment gets worn through quickly, apparently due to how often it is read in the bath.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"All the more reason to be careful what you download. I'm serious, the FBI has put black-boxes on ISPs recently. Those boxes have the ability to see what ISP requests information, and what consumer of that ISP requested within that ISP's domain. Basically, they are watching every move everybody makes on the internet. It's not as un-watched as it used to be. "
Who cares? I mean, I'll fight for my privacy if it actually bugs me, but who really cares if the government is bored enough to read what music you're downloadind?
I really don't have much time to search E-books. (Maybe someone could get me started...... ) And I really don't have enough money to buy out of print books, or enough time to go find a library that miht have one. I have searched through the 50 library chain's card catalauge here, maybe I'll check Boston's..... But that's really all I can do.
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Who cares? I mean, I'll fight for my privacy if it actually bugs me, but who really cares if the government is bored enough to read what music you're downloadind?
Everybody who downloads music should care. You can be fined 250,000 dollars and put in jail for 5 years. Ever read the warning on movies? The same law applies to music.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
They couldn't possibly convict everybody who used music dowload sites, it's illogical, and any lawyer can make a case if you are randomly picked from the millions who download music.
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: They couldn't possibly convict everybody who used music dowload sites, it's illogical, and any lawyer can make a case if you are randomly picked from the millions who download music.
No, but they do convict the most active ones. I disagree about the lawyer. You can't make a case on a simple law: It's illegal to download music free off the internet. It's as simple as that.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, but I'm not terribly active, and wouldn't they sue they music download sites first? Well it doesn't matter, I'm pretty secure in the fact that I wont get in trouble.
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not caring about who is right here, I just don't want to see people get busted for downloading music. All I ask is to be careful what you download online. Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
wow, moozh, if you were just going to spend all your energy rationalizing why it is okay for you to just download what you want to read, then why did you even bother to ask?
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that Icarus brought up some very interesting points above, namely that buying a used book does NOT put any money into the hands of the author or publisher. So if a book is currently out of print, there is really nothing you could do that would deprive the author of a sale.
BUT, sometimes items are kept out of print on purpose, to cycle demand. I don't know of this happening in the literary world, but Disney does it all the time with their videos. They release the videos of their "in demand" items for a limited time, and then about 10 years later (time enough for a new generation of munchkins to be born) they send out another limited release. In this case, dl'ing a Disney cartoon would (potentionally) be depriving the studio of a future sale. If you want it now bad enough to wade throug 20 crappy divx rips to get the one good one out there, think how excited you will be next year for the re-re-re-release of the Little Mermaid.
Posts: 258 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is also a good time to post my biggest pet peave about e-texts:
I am NOT going to pay more for an electronic copy of a book than I would pay at the local B&N or amazon.com for a print copy that I can curl up with!!!
There is virtually no distribution costs, no warehousing cost, no printing cost, no sales clerks, no expensive bookstore/cafe, no lights, no rent, no heat/air-conditioning. Where do they get their prices from??? You would think they would be able to sell the e-book for a fraction of the regular price and still make money.
Current Example: Barnes and Noble has Shadow Puppets for $20.76 in Hardcover. The MS-Reader version is $25.95
And they wonder why this format is not catching on???
Posts: 258 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry I wasn't more clear, I'm careful about downloading music, and I don't know who ius right, but I havn't seen any cases yet, so if hings get dangerous I'll stop. What I'm asking is do you think OSC would mind? I guess he wouldn't get the money at a used bookstore, or he could be doing the Disney thing, but does he have any moral things against it. Would he mind? (It's not like the 25 cents he'd actually get will make any difference to him.)
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know much about the e-book business. But I did want to point out that even if you buy the book at a used book store the author DID recieve payment for that copy when it was originally purchased. If the author recieves payment for each d/l copy of an e-book then it would be okay. But if this is basically a copy that the owner recieved no payment for then it is not okay. It is stealing. Its like walking in B&N, grabbing a paperback and sticking it in your bookbag and walking out.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just don't have respect for people who read/listen to writing/music without letting some sort of royalty get to the author.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Generally, I agree... But what about that Swedish thrash metal that just isnt available in the US? If your in to music enough, you wont be able to get your hands on everything you like. Maybe you can relate that to literature somehow, for some obscure author that no library sells, but there it is on a file share search. Ive never done it before, and I dont really plan to, and of course OSC isnt very obscure. This, in my opinion, is the only time its okay to download stuff.
Granted, its completely illegal, but an unenforcable law doesnt hold much ground.
Posts: 26 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you're saying because a law is unenforecable, it doesn't make it a crime to break that law?
If you really want something bad enough, you can buy it online. Any "swedish thrash-metal" can be bought somewhere on the internet I guarantee you.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's worth noting that OSC has said before that he doesn't mind when people read his stuff without paying for it-be it from the libary, loans from friends, or otherwise.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Im sure it is there to find for sale on the net. But.. shipping and handling and processing and all that junk adds up to over $25 for a single CD. I agree totally, its wrong to avoid that price, but what do you think most people are going to do?
And the law -is- unenforcable, so why not really? The vast majority of people never even consider royalties going to the creator of whatever they download. And it isnt going to stop. Theres hundreds of file share programs to download if the gov. shuts one down.
So.. it is a bad thing, but what do you plan on doing about it?
Posts: 26 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Me personally? I don't download from music sharing sites, except from the legal ones where I pay a buck a song or something like that. I think "everyone's doing it" and "they can't stop me" are pitiful justifications.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: So.. it is a bad thing, but what do you plan on doing about it?
I don't plan on doing anything. I plan on telling those that I care about not to do it, because the law will not be unenforcable for long.
quote: I think "everyone's doing it" and "they can't stop me" are pitiful justifications.
Exactly Icarus. I was wondering, is your name Icarus with a capital "I", or is it lcarus with a lowercase "l"?
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
Filesharing is here, and it's here to stay. For good or ill, filesharing programs are at a point where it would be a gross violation of privacy to eliminate it from every computer.
Second-generation (as in post-Napster)filesharing programs like Kazaa, Morpheus, Acquire (for macintosh), and the various Gnutella clients are peer-to-peer. There are no defined servers, there is no "headquarters". Shutting down filesharing programs wouldn't just be shutting down a company, since not all filesharing programs have an associated company. Gnutella, for instance, is a GNU-license program. Clients are freeware, made by computer enthusiests in their free time. They don't get paid, and they release all their source code.
I don't approve of filesharing some things. For instance, I don't approve of downloading computer games, novels, or any other marginally-profitable forms of art. I do, however, support downloading music. It's been shown conclusively that album sales went /up/ after filesharing became mainstream. Record companies aren't starving.
Uh oh... late for class. Pick up on the rant later, I guess. :-D
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Filesharing is here, and it's here to stay.
You can't possibly know that.
And while there is no servers for programs like Kazaa, the creators can be held liable for the crime that the users commit in using it.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do, however, support downloading music. It's been shown conclusively that album sales went /up/ after filesharing became mainstream. Record companies aren't starving.
This is more or less OSC's argument for why the record companies are being stupid about file sharing. Be that as it may, they own the copyrights, and they have not given permission. Just because you can do something doesn't make it right. Just because you rationalize that it does the artist no harm doesn't make it right. If you download something owned by somebody without permission and without payment, you are stealing.
quote:Filesharing is here, and it's here to stay. For good or ill, filesharing programs are at a point where it would be a gross violation of privacy to eliminate it from every computer.
This dodges the question. The question does not regard the enforceability of the law, or the likelihood of turning back the clock. The question is about the morality of stealing.
If you steal something because you don't feel like paying it, or because you are not wealthy and are unwilling to do without something that is not a necessity, that's immoral, in my opinion.
Now rationalize it away. Tell me it's okay to steal from wealthy corporations. Tell me it's okay because you can't be caught. Tell yourself it's okay because you're just a drop in the bucket. Tell yourself it's okay because record, book, and software prices are inappropriately high. Tell yourself whatever you want; I'm not the morality police.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: If you steal something because you don't feel like paying it, or because you are not wealthy and are unwilling to do without something that is not a necessity, that's immoral, in my opinion.
Often times I grab a non-single song or two from an album I might want to buy. If the tracks aren't to my liking, I delete them and forget I ever heard them (except those horrible ones that get in my head *shudder*). I'm not made of money and I'm not willing to pay for albums I will never listen to. The only loss to the record company is that I buy fewer albums because I can preclude the ones I don't like.
I feel that, while morally ambiguous, it is in the end no worse than listening to the CDs at my local Wal-Mart using their barcode-reader demo whatsis.
Note that many of the same tracks I acquire from Kazaa are available from Amazon.com as sample music. The only difference between streaming it from their site repeatedly and grabbing it permanently off of Kazaa is that Amazon is liscenced and streaming it repeatedly wastes bandwidth.
quote: Now rationalize it away. Tell me it's okay to steal from wealthy corporations. Tell me it's okay because you can't be caught. Tell yourself it's okay because you're just a drop in the bucket. Tell yourself it's okay because record, book, and software prices are inappropriately high. Tell yourself whatever you want; I'm not the morality police.
My only rationalization is that it's a win-win scenario. I get to know more about the album I'm purchasing, the record company get's my hard earned dollars.
I belive that I qualified before that I do not download, nor do I condone the downloading, of novels, computer games, movies, or other marginally-profitable art forms. As far as buisiness or non-entertainment software goes, I use open source freeware almost exclusively. Some of which I acquired through filesharing programs.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I feel that, while morally ambiguous, it is in the end no worse than listening to the CDs at my local Wal-Mart using their barcode-reader demo whatsis.
You're still being shortsighted. Wal-Mart bought the CD's that you can listen to correct? They would then mark it up for their profit and to compensate for the price they paid for it. So the record companies got the money that you listen to in Wal-Mart too. Furthermore, you can't take that listening station home, can you?That was a poor example.
When you download a song, you can keep it as long as you want listen to it at your leisure. You can even burn it on a CD if you want to.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: When you download a song, you can keep it as long as you want listen to it at your leisure.
I think you underestimate the time I spend in Wal-Mart.
Seriously, though, yes, there is some effect on downloading music as opposed to listening to it at the demo whatsis (what are they called, anyway?). I can listen to it at my liesure and even burn it to CD, but I don't. The effect of listening to it at home rather than at Wal-Mart is that Wal-Mart looses some profit. I, personally, don't care. I have no love for Wal-Mart at all. If Wal-Mart were gone tomorrow, I would jump for joy. It represents to me all that is shallow and consumerist in America, as far as I am concerned. I suppose I'm morally void when it comes to large discount chain stores. I do my very best not to buy things through any large chain store, if I can help it. Sadly, this is becoming less common, even in relatively-isolated Vermont.
My model of downloading and listening to music is an unusual one, I admit, but I don't see anything morally wrong with it.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never saw anyone reply to this, so I think I might:
quote: I don't know the answer to your question, but it seems like a good place to post a question of my own, since no doubt a Card will read this thread.
I make use of a device called the Molecular Disruptor Device, patterned after the Dr. Device, in one of my short stories. Its purpose in the story is to be your stereotypical (and merely theoretical) doomsday device, while more concrete issues drive the story forward. I intend it to be an homage, just as OSC used the Ansible as an homage to LeGuin. I have seen him write that, in general, this is ok.
Is what I am doing acceptable?
I haven't yet succeeded in selling the story, but partly that's because I start with the top paying markets and work my way down. I'm wondering, though, if editors are seeing my MD Device, believing that I am stealing from Card (and foolish enough to believe nobody will know), and rejecting me for being amateurish. So, a further quesiton is: if this homage is okay, could I make a comment in my cover letter to the effect that I have Card's permission to do this? Or is such a statement not necessary because people will correctly divine my intentions?
I'm pretty sure that OSC says in his book, How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy, that it's a-okay to include references to other, commonly known, science fiction devices. I belive he uses the Ansible and Hyperspace as examples. Hyperspace is a term that everyone knows for FTL drive. If it's going to take a lot of extra writing to describe your own FTL drive, but it's basically Hyperspace, use Hyperspace. OSC used the Ansible for his series because a lot of scifi readers already knew what an ansible was, and he didn't have to get into the details of its behavior.
I don't see any problem with referring to your doomsday device as a Molecular Disruption device or MD device. I'd shy away from calling it the Little Doctor, though. I think that "Little Doctor" is more of in-book slang that might be hard to convincingly port over into your own story.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nick, youre a good man, and very right on the issue. However, theres always a 'but... '
Morality isnt enough to keep me from downloading a few pieces of music. In the end, Im not hurting anything. Nothing. Sure, if everyone thinks this way it ends up taking business away and all that stuff, but me personally 'stealing' a few tracks will economically mean nothing. As youve said before, this still doesnt make it right. I guess the best I can come up with is, not wrong enough to stop.
Actually, for and example.. The metal band I was talking about before is called In Flames. Ive bought every CD Ive found here, only because I discovered how much I liked them after downloading them. Ive also bought tickets to a concert. So, the way I see it, file sharing is a way to find what you like. Who can complain that Ive stolen anything? Thats why I say very rare things and very remote things are okay to download. Kind of a advertisement deal.
You could say Ive fabricated an excuse to make up for what I downloaded, and you wouldnt be completely wrong. What Im trying to do is this: admit I'm doing bad/immoral/unethical things, yet refuse to stop because it really isnt a big deal.
Posts: 26 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always felt that if you download music you should only do it if: A) You already have that music and want it on your computer or B)You want to listen to it before you buy it.
This doesn't change the legality (or lack thereof ) of downloading music, but I think that if you are firmly in one of those two categories, your morality shouldn't suffer.
I absoluetly refuse to download texts or programs (besides freeware and shareware of course ), since with music you download an inferior quality and then you might go out to buy the real thing, but with texts and programs, you download exactly what you get when you buy it. Perhaps if you really tried, you could put texts and programs into the first or second category, but I don't think I could download a program and then go out and buy it.
posted
I think fileshareing for music is good idea but it shuold be more like Video Game Emulation where you can play it on ur comp. but unless you own the game you'r suposed to delet it within 24 hrs. so they should just make it so that when you download a song it quits working after a certein time and if you wan't to listen to it more you have to D/L it agin but i'm not sure if this is possable but the main point is that the shareing is good becasue it lets you sample a CD adn if you like it you can get the whole thing its kinda like D/Ling a demo for a Game you wan't to try but aren't sure about so rather then wasteing your money on a game you endup not likeing you bye a differnt one and still go back to the company of the game you didn't like becsaue they don't force you to test it after you purcese it. But, im kinda bored and just rambleing so im gona end this reply.
Posts: 397 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
