[sdiy] OTA book on eBay

[Fiercefish]

Totally agree with the principal Tim, as a recording artist myself I have been the "victim" of copyright theft on countless occassions, my point (and it was a bit devils advocate) is that Mr Henry is concerned enough that his work is being "stolen" yet seems (from what I can gather from the various comments so far) unwilling to make it available legally. To me this seems like crying over spilt milk, if I were in the same situation I'd take action or shut up. But there's no way I'd say "well I'm not going to release any more" that seems like cutting one's nose off to spite the face.

Now, lots of my work has found its way onto file sharing networks despite it being readily available to buy, but still it is pirated (as is almost everything nowadays), it does not bother me too much since those that download it probably would not have bought it anyway, thats not to say it is right but its just by-product of the freedom of information, the other way to look at it is that it allows a work to reach a far wider audience than the "old days".

Don't think I am condoning copyright theft though, it is wrong but it still happens, its upto the owner of the copyright to deal with it (or not). I am in no way judging Mr Henry, it is after all, his choice, I was just putting my way of dealing with the situation. I just can't see the argument by the author for loss of revenue for something that is not legally available.

As a side note I'd gladly buy the book <legally> but would not buy a copy, also I was interested in building Thomas Henry's "Super Controller" but gave up since it is no longer available so thats 2 lost sales right there.

FF
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tim Parkhurst 
  To: Fiercefish 
  Cc: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl 
  Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 11:38 PM
  Subject: Re: [sdiy] OTA book on eBay


  On 10/12/05, Fiercefish <fiercefish at btinternet.com> wrote: 
    I find this whole issue pretty idiotic, guy writes book, guy sells book, guy
    stops selling book, other guys still want book, copy guy copies book, copy 
    guy sells book to other guys, first guy admits that copy guy is not
    authorised to sell book, guy still does not sell book, guy moans that copy
    guy will stop him from writing and selling future books, eventually copy guy 
    gets busted/bored and no longer sells book, first guy still will not sell
    book, other guys still want book, book gone, no more books, guy won't sell
    book, other guys still want book, ad infinitum.

    Its undoubtedley illegal and morally wrong to copy someone else's work, this 
    is clear. But the author (so it seems) is not interested in the book (and
    presumably profits from it) so legal and moral issues aside who is in the
    wrong? Sure the copy guy is doing it for profit, but he has noticed a gap in 
    the market and applied the basic business model of supply and demand, ok so
    he should have got permission, but so should everyone who ever recorded a
    song off the radio etc.

    Many would gladly buy the book legally if it were available and not even 
    entertain buying an unauthorised copy, yet the author neither makes the book
    available for sale from a third party, or sells it himself or even puts it
    in the public domain - all of which would take the market away from the copy 
    guy. WTF, seems kind of a spoilt brat attitude to me, because even if there
    is a reason why the author can't undertake the sales himself surely he could
    licence it to some third party, no?

    Maybe I am missing something, I would be interested in hearing other 
    opinions.

    FF

  The number of people who want the book, or what they're willing to pay, or even what they think of the author has NOTHING to do with it. THE BOOK IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. IT IS SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY. It doesn't matter whether the author is being a 'brat,' selling unauthorized copies is just like someone walking into your house and walking out with your TV. If the thief said "well, he wasn't watching it. In fact, he hasn't even turned it on for a month and it's a really nice TV," that doesn't change the fact that it's your TV and you can do with it whatever the hell you want. Sorry, but your argument does NOT hold water. 

  The material in the Thomas Henry books belongs to Thomas Henry and he can give copies away on the corner, or never ever print another copy 'til the end of time. The point remains: It is Mr. Henry's decision! Just because there is a lot of demand for the material, that does not make it okay for someone else to copy it and sell it. It also DOES NOT MATTER whether Thomas Henry (or any other author) makes a living selling the book, or if he just makes a few bucks here and there from it. THE MATERIAL IN THE BOOK BELONGS TO THE AUTHOR. The laws of supply and demand DO NOT justify stealing. A lot of people want big screen TVs, but that doesn't mean that it's okay to steal them from a store and sell them on eBay. 

  I'm not trying to be too heavy handed here, but I'm just trying to show you that copyrighted material belongs to the author, and only the author can make decisions regarding distribution and sale of that material. The same rules apply whether it's a song, a poem, a photo or a book. 


  Tim (when did I become the copyright police, and why do I have to keep explaining that stealing is wrong) Servo
  -- 
  "Imagination is more important than knowledge." - Albert Einstein 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
  Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/130 - Release Date: 12/10/2005
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20051013/45cd0c58/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/130 - Release Date: 12/10/2005