I think there are definite gray areas here. One thought that comes to mind is - if your friend has a book and lends it to you, you're not paying for it. Sure they did, but what if that friend lends it out to just 1 friend. Thats ok right? What about 10 friends? Still probably acceptable and nobody would judge that person. What if that person lends the book to a different friend every month, every week - for the rest of their life? Now you're suddenly talking hundreds and thousands of readers benefitting from the book without paying for it. But also that is the fundamental concept of a library. A book is bought and read by masses - thousands - over the years of our lifetime - and even longer - its lifetime. Someone buying a book and putting the content online for other readers is considered piracy, while at the library its considered a friendly community building neighborhood activity and government funded institution. I'm not trying to condemn one thing nor the other, just to shine a light on the interesting paradigms created with how our society views and labels things that inherently seem quite related when boiled down to the logistics. If piracy is wrong, i.e. reading a book you didn't pay for, when is it ok to lend your ownership and when is it not? Is it about the amount of people who it can be lent to? Does it have to be government funded? What makes it right and what makes it wrong? Just pondering :)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yeah its complicated 😂.
no, it is not complicate and here are some facts to back up what you originally stated and i agree:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/nov/06/pirated-ebooks-threaten-future-of-serial-novels-warn-authors-maggie-stiefvater
http://www.ala.org/tools/librariestransform/piracy-0
http://libguides.usc.edu/c.php?g=235078&p=1561833
It's complicated in the sense, that everyone is in different situations.
not when there are plenty of sites with free information as posted after i wrote this one. not sure you read everyone's posts.
This debate has been had for a long time, ever since Napster and all through the Pirate Bay arrests and the ease with which piracy can be had on the Steem blockchain where there is no DMCA that can remove the appended transactions.
I think that there's a lot to talk about. For example, with torrents, you're not really lending it, or giving it to friends, but to anyone who may want access to it for free. It would be, maybe, the equivalent of granting access to a private gallery to anyone just because they happen to walk by your stand and ask if you have free tickets to expensive stuff lying around.
I know it's different, but there's a lot of analogies that can be made for and against many kinds of piracy. I really love to explore these topics, but now it's 5 am and I'm going to sleep. Byebye! <3