Slashdot Mirror
Sharing Still Doesn't Hurt
Robotech_Master writes "Eric Flint has posted two new Prime Palaver rants. The first one is a continuation of the one that was mentioned here on Slashdot the other day, about the Free Library, the e-book, encryption, and you:'One thing you have to understand about this whole controversy is how much of it is sheer hot air. Many authors and most publishers, when they address this issue, give people the impression they're at risk of losing their shirt through electronic "piracy." That's pure hogwash[...]' The second is a response to the idea of boycotting Harlan Ellison for his anti-piracy stance (and I imagine some Slashdot faces will be red over some of what he has to say!)." We linked to Ellison's rant last year.
See "An Analysis of Current File-Sharing Systems" for more information. IRC trading is the way to go. Branding is just as important in the piracy scene as in corporate America, and specific IRC channels are devoted entirely to single ripping groups.
Ever checked your MP3 comment fields? Most of mine, at least, are riddled with tags from ripping groups, claming credit for their hard work. EGO, CMS, or my personal favorite Team RNS, infiltrate recording studios and provide high-quality rips as zips. You can trust these groups to provide high-quality 192kbps rips, they must provide quality or face dimishining of their brand name. However, once the secondary crowd gets their hands on the perfect MP3s via IRC, they share on second-level trading networks such as FastTrack, OpenNap, Gnutella, Blubster, or WinMX. That's where the problem begins. By using a trusted source, one can easily get perfect copies of CDs online, several times easier than a retail store can provide.
"The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
My understanding was: libraries are a public resource, and they BUY BOOKS. When the book wears out completely, maybe they'll buy another book. You're making it sound like they pay a royalty- actually that's what you said outright.
If it is true, anywhere, that a library pays a royalty on (say) per-check-out or per-year (as is true for some scientific journals!) this should be fixed. Libraries are a public resource. An important one, unless you like cultivating uneducated peasantry.
#1. Flint is a published author making a very good living selling SF books. His books are probably in your local bookstore.
I'd say he has a pot to piss in. He's also been helped financially by 'losing control of his work.' He has cold hard numbers about how he has made MORE money by his work getting out where all of us 'thieves' can read it free of charge.
Flint says first and formost that Ellison is within his rights, but as laws change, it is hurting the publishing industry, and authors. That is most assuredly his business.
The too-restrictive laws are also hurting our culture. This is also his business. Mine too. Mabye even yours. Flint makes the point that Shakespeare wouldn't have been able to legally make the works he did, had our copyrights been in place. Surely you can see the implications of that.
hanzie,
bibliophile and car nut.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.