Not true. Like I said, file sharing can not be illegal until they
figure out how to copyright every file. this will never be
possible.Publishers, both music and book, are just going
to have to get out of the dark ages and figure out a paradigm
that works in today's electronic world.


"katysails" wrote in message ...


-- The only person who is violating the copyright
is the ONE individual who scans his book into electronic format AND
makes it available on the net.

That makes you guilty of aiding and aavetting a crime...guilt by association is no less guilt than by action...
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Gulp! I have to agree with Simp on this one.
SV

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Nonsense. The copyright is on the original books purchased and not
on any electronic copies that might be floating around. Once a single
book is purchased any electronic copies it generates are not covered
and cannot be covered. The book has value and that's what the
author makes money on. There will always be plenty enough
people willing to buy books to make it profitable for a publisher
to print them. It is unrealistic to think a copyright exists on anything
but the book itself. The only person who is violating the copyright
is the ONE individual who scans his book into electronic format AND
makes it available on the net. Any and all people who download the
available electronic book are doing nothing wrong. It is not illegal to
download files and never will be illegal to download files. Remember,
the file is NOT copyrighted and never will be copyrighted.


"katysails" wrote in message
...
Anybody who can figure out how to
share his book has every right to

There is a huge difference between sharing a purchased object and
sharing copywritten material. Once the cake is shared it is
gone. Printed and recorded material are the extension of the
author/artist, and yes, every time it is shared within the
timeframe established by the copyright laws there should be a moneytary
gain for them. That's why there is a timeframe. Once
the timeframe has been reached then copy away to your hearts
content...but not until then. You, sir, are a thief of the first
order.

--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Can't have your cake and eat it too, huh, Scotty.
"Scott Vernon" wrote in message ...
The cake thing is a poor example. You should have asked if someone borrows a
book and reads it, then?

Scotty

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...


She doesn't "deserve" squat! She is entitled to royalties on those
books she sells. That's all! Anybody who can figure out how to
share his book has every right to.

The same goes for music. If an artist (these days that's a very
loose term) sells CDs then he is entitled to a percentage of
the proceeds. He does not deserve one red cent for those
electronic copies produced elsewhere or distributed over
the net.

If you buy a cake at the store are you forbidden to share it
with all your friends. Do the cake makers insist every individual
who eats a piece of their cake pay a royalty?


"katysails" wrote in message
...
Only
a putz buys books and music in this day and age.


Then I'm really glad I'm a putz since she deserves the royalties for her
work...and you are highly unethical and immoral...but
hen, we all knew that...

--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein