3 ms·
Why are only libraries the only possible source? The readers could -- I know this will shock the ears around here-- pay for what they consume. Amazon remained o
by xhkkffbf 6y ago
Why are only libraries the only possible source? The readers could -- I know this will shock the ears around here-- pay for what they consume. Amazon remained open and so did many other bookstores like Powell's.
No one was denied books. They were only slightly inconvenienced by not getting them for free.
- syshum 6y agoI did already pay for them via my tax dollars that were used by the Public Libraries to obtain them for me so I and my fellow tax payers could borrow them.
- xhkkffbf 6y agoAnd those books are still sitting in the shelf. No one is taking them away. Just because the library is closed doesn't mean you can run up the pirate flag. Piracy hurts artists.
- syshum 6y agoPublishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as “piracy.” In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.) If you don't believe that copying not approved by the publisher is just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word “piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your neighbor.” A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that “piracy” and “theft” are smear words.