4 ms·

I find it interesting that the programming community is willing to 'donate' billions of dollars worth of value as FLOSS every year, many of which are for tools

I find it interesting that the programming community is willing to 'donate' billions of dollars worth of value as FLOSS every year, many of which are for tools used by authors also. Yet even during a pandemic, when visiting a physical library can literally be life threatening, most mainstream authors, (there are exceptions, but few and far between), still hold onto their "intellectual property rights" with all they can. Is there an industry that gives a similar/larger amount away for free in value? Serious question. The only other thing I can think of is various volunteering doctors and the like, but I am specifically interested in terms of "intellectual property" value produced.

jjcon 6y ago
We have the luxury of having job security and very high salaries, artists and authors by large do not - if IP was abandoned and nobody could make money on software we would all be calling for lawsuits. Just because one medium is easier to pirate doesn’t mean it deserves to be pirated. > Yet even during a pandemic, when visiting a physical library can literally be life threatening Nearly all libraries already have digital lending programs that are legal and controlled... IA just distributed pirated copies.
- AsyncAwait 6y ago
  > We have the luxury of having job security and very high salaries I think this view is colored by SV salaries. There are many places where programmers are paid in line with other kinds of skilled labor. > if IP was abandoned and nobody could make money on software we would all be calling for lawsuits Doubt it. Quite a few companies already make money on integrating solutions, support and consultancy services. A great amount of software already has very lax licenses. But I am not calling for that. I am simply asking for a bit of compassion during an unprecedented situation. > Just because one medium is easier to pirate Are you saying books are easier to pirate than software? If so, I have news for you. > Nearly all libraries already have digital lending programs that are legal and controlled Quite a few don't or the process is super convoluted, proprietary, requires plugins, mobile apps, Windows only etc. > IA just distributed pirated copies. There were certain restrictions in place, like time restrictions, but I guess this shows there's no appeasing the copyright lobby so next time IA might as well place no restrictions on it whatsoever. The backslash is the same.
  - jjcon 6y ago
    > I think this view is colored by SV salaries I’ve never worked in SV > Are you saying books are easier to pirate than software? If so, I have news for you. Have you worked in software in the past decade? Everything is run as a service, either entirely online or backed by online services... good luck pirating that. > Quite a few don't or the process is super convoluted, proprietary, requires plugins, mobile apps, Windows only etc. As of 2015 90% of libraries had a digital lending program - you have no idea what you are talking about. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/09/15/who-uses-libraries-and-what-they-do-at-their-libraries/ https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/09/15/who-uses-lib... > The backslash is the same Except that again >90% of libraries do it legally without lawsuit because they follow the rules that respect artists and authors.
    - AsyncAwait 6y ago
      > I’ve never worked in SV I am assuming you're from the U.S. Software salaries there are inflated practically everywhere compared to most of the rest of the world. > As of 2015 90% of libraries had a digital lending program - you have no idea what you are talking about. It's true that this was maybe 5 years back, (when I was still at uni), but while the option existed, it required some Windows/Mac only SW to decrypt the DRM and the reader itself was way worse in terms of features than literally any PDF reader. As one form of "protection", you couldn't even highlight text. That is a major part for me to focus on the part I am currently reading and thus made the whole thing practically unusable for me. I don't think you're quite aware just how awful most of this software is. It's one thing for it being "available" and quite another for it to be a "good experience".
      - jjcon 6y ago
        > I don't think you're quite aware just how awful most of this software is. Having used the software across three different states recently I have yet to see one that doesn’t let me pull library books right onto my kindle - don’t think I could ask for a better experience.
        6y ago
jawns 6y ago
I think if the IA had contacted authors and said, "Hey, would you be willing to make your book available for lending as part of our national emergency program?" the average author would have been willing to opt in. But IA did not do that. Instead, it decided for itself that the authors should waive their intellectual property rights. I'll admit, there are some factors that make this complex. For one, many authors have book deals with traditional publishers, who would also need to be a party to the agreement, and they have different interests than individual authors do. For another, an opt-in program is currently infeasible, particularly for books that are older and out of print. That doesn't automatically mean, though, that an opt-out program is OK. Instead, it likely means that in the absence of a way to get authors' permission beforehand, there is no legal, ethical way to pull off what IA has tried to pull off. But my point is that you're comparing the programming community's voluntary "donation" of open-source software to an involuntary "donation" on the part of authors. When you take something that belongs to me without asking me, then even if I would have been willing to donate it had I been asked, you've still stolen something from me.

jjcon 6y ago

We have the luxury of having job security and very high salaries, artists and authors by large do not - if IP was abandoned and nobody could make money on software we would all be calling for lawsuits. Just because one medium is easier to pirate doesn’t mean it deserves to be pirated. > Yet even during a pandemic, when visiting a physical library can literally be life threatening Nearly all libraries already have digital lending programs that are legal and controlled... IA just distributed pirated copies.

AsyncAwait 6y ago
> We have the luxury of having job security and very high salaries I think this view is colored by SV salaries. There are many places where programmers are paid in line with other kinds of skilled labor. > if IP was abandoned and nobody could make money on software we would all be calling for lawsuits Doubt it. Quite a few companies already make money on integrating solutions, support and consultancy services. A great amount of software already has very lax licenses. But I am not calling for that. I am simply asking for a bit of compassion during an unprecedented situation. > Just because one medium is easier to pirate Are you saying books are easier to pirate than software? If so, I have news for you. > Nearly all libraries already have digital lending programs that are legal and controlled Quite a few don't or the process is super convoluted, proprietary, requires plugins, mobile apps, Windows only etc. > IA just distributed pirated copies. There were certain restrictions in place, like time restrictions, but I guess this shows there's no appeasing the copyright lobby so next time IA might as well place no restrictions on it whatsoever. The backslash is the same.
- jjcon 6y ago
  > I think this view is colored by SV salaries I’ve never worked in SV > Are you saying books are easier to pirate than software? If so, I have news for you. Have you worked in software in the past decade? Everything is run as a service, either entirely online or backed by online services... good luck pirating that. > Quite a few don't or the process is super convoluted, proprietary, requires plugins, mobile apps, Windows only etc. As of 2015 90% of libraries had a digital lending program - you have no idea what you are talking about. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/09/15/who-uses-libraries-and-what-they-do-at-their-libraries/ https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/09/15/who-uses-lib... > The backslash is the same Except that again >90% of libraries do it legally without lawsuit because they follow the rules that respect artists and authors.
  - AsyncAwait 6y ago
    > I’ve never worked in SV I am assuming you're from the U.S. Software salaries there are inflated practically everywhere compared to most of the rest of the world. > As of 2015 90% of libraries had a digital lending program - you have no idea what you are talking about. It's true that this was maybe 5 years back, (when I was still at uni), but while the option existed, it required some Windows/Mac only SW to decrypt the DRM and the reader itself was way worse in terms of features than literally any PDF reader. As one form of "protection", you couldn't even highlight text. That is a major part for me to focus on the part I am currently reading and thus made the whole thing practically unusable for me. I don't think you're quite aware just how awful most of this software is. It's one thing for it being "available" and quite another for it to be a "good experience".
    - jjcon 6y ago
      > I don't think you're quite aware just how awful most of this software is. Having used the software across three different states recently I have yet to see one that doesn’t let me pull library books right onto my kindle - don’t think I could ask for a better experience.
      - 6y ago

jawns 6y ago

I think if the IA had contacted authors and said, "Hey, would you be willing to make your book available for lending as part of our national emergency program?" the average author would have been willing to opt in. But IA did not do that. Instead, it decided for itself that the authors should waive their intellectual property rights. I'll admit, there are some factors that make this complex. For one, many authors have book deals with traditional publishers, who would also need to be a party to the agreement, and they have different interests than individual authors do. For another, an opt-in program is currently infeasible, particularly for books that are older and out of print. That doesn't automatically mean, though, that an opt-out program is OK. Instead, it likely means that in the absence of a way to get authors' permission beforehand, there is no legal, ethical way to pull off what IA has tried to pull off. But my point is that you're comparing the programming community's voluntary "donation" of open-source software to an involuntary "donation" on the part of authors. When you take something that belongs to me without asking me, then even if I would have been willing to donate it had I been asked, you've still stolen something from me.