If they photocopy it, yes.

Dosent matter whether they are lending the book out to a freind, they are still depriving the author and publishers of money because if that person did not lend it they would have to buy it. Its the exact same thing as what the game industry is trying to stop the buying and selling and lending of games.

Luckily big companies like NetFlix aren't so silly about it.

The Los Angeles Public Library lends digital media and, at any given time, they can loan however many copies they bought. Does lending a book decrease sales? Very likely, but by such a negligible number that nobody much cares. If, for every person who buys a book, there are two or three more who don't need it any more, that is not that big a deal. The orders of magnitude for online sharing are very different when tens of thousands of people don't need to buy that book any more, yet the stats show they were interested. I know I find it frustrating when I find my work in a forum where it has obviously been downloaded tens of thousands of times and people are saying really nice things, like they rarely do on the SNS systems any more, and, as a creative person, I want to leave the files there, but, as a business person, I know it is DMCA time.

Does it really matter "how many" people are sharing files or lending books, games or even selling used games it is still stealing and considerd piracy. If the game industry is loosing money because of people buying and selling or lending games to freinds and family so are book publishers and it should also be made illegal. You cant have one law saying sharing on the internet is illegal and than say sharing of a book or game is not just because they dont loose the same amount of money. Its Piracy plain and simple.

I disagree. If I buy a book and then lend it or give it to a friend I am not distributing it. I no longer have the book and they do. If they give it it back to me when they are done than they no longer have it and I do. Even with the Kindles and Nooks they are now allowing people to share books for a limited time. They also allow you to have multiple kindles/nooks on the same account so that more than one person can read the books you buy.

Still, this is likely all stuff that takes place within your group of friends/family and it involves a single copy of the book. It isn't the same as you making a copy of the book and then giving that copy out to 100 different people while also keeping a copy for yourself.

As I said above it does not matter if you only lend it to your friend or family members, it is still taking money from the publishers. How many familys and friends do this around the world ? A lot of people do it, and why do you think the game industry is trying to stop it ? because they are loosing revenue. They are pirates who are sharing just like the internet file sharers do. If I copy one of your files I am not actually physically stealing it either because you still have your copy.

The one very big difference between 90% of file sharing on the net and sharing a book or game between friends, is you are not making money from it like most of the file sharing, but you are still taking that sale away from the publisher by sharing so you are infact a pirate and just as bad as internet file sharers.

The future game consoles will not allow you to share a game between friends or family unless they are using the same console. This will stop the lending and buying and selling of used games because they are loosing money. But wait is this not what all the big problem is with porn web sites loosing sales ? Dosent matter how big or small a lost sale is a lost sale through sharing whether its a book or a game or a porn site

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1055291

So what about a DVD. If I go rent or buy a DVD this afternoon and invite a group of friends over tonight to watch it should I charge them all an admission fee and then send that money to the MPAA because otherwise we all get to consume the video, but we only paid for one copy of it?

The main difference between lending books to a friend and sharing files on the internet is that when I share a book (or CD or DVD) with a friend, there is still only one copy of it and only one of us can use it at any given time. When I share it online I am making copies of it that I am distributing to others so others get to use it and I still have my copy.

I can understand your argument. If I never loaned a book to anyone there is a chance that those people might go out and buy that book on their own, but there is just as good a chance that they wouldn't have.

Another question. How do you feel about the sale of used books? If I buy a book, read it then sell it on Ebay or Amazon or even sell it to a local book store is that piracy?

First sale doctrine. But I see you want to do away with all property laws and control what people do WITH MERCHANDISE THEY ALREADY PAID FOR.

Selling used anything costs companies money. Can I not sell my fucking house because it keeps the developer from selling someone a new one?

It looks like you are on a troll spree today but wtf?

Would you buy 1 Cinema ticket and then expect all your friends to get in for free ? Its the same concept as renting a movie and letting all your freinds watch. and as to your book question depends if you have a right/licence to sell other peoples content !! If not then you are selling content which you have no right to make money on plain and simple you are a pirate selling other peoples content

I never troll :)

:thumbsup

Lending a book or giving it away for free is fine, you paid for the book, the physical copy is yours to do what you want with.

Go make a thousand copies of that book and start giving those copies away and you are committing an illegal act and that is what digital file sharing pirates are doing and finally the government understands it.

How to stop it - that's the hard part.

There is a difference. If I bought 1 ticket to the theater and expected to get 10 people in to see the show with that one ticket, in theory I could be taking up 9 seats that they could be selling to someone else. With the DVD that isn't the case. There isn't a line of potential paying customers at my door and I am denying them access by giving it to my friends.

So again, please tell me, should I be charging my friends to come over and watch this movie?

Also, where does the rule of license stop? So in your opinion I can't buy a book, read it then sell it. But can I buy a car, use it for a little while then sell it? Can I buy a house live in it for a while then sell it? Can I buy clothes, wear them for a while then sell them? Can I buy a TV, watch it for a while then sell it?

I'm not distributing the book. I am not selling the rights to the book. I am simply selling a single copy that I bought. It really isn't any different than when my local store buys a copy of the book from a distributor and sells it to me. Only there the book is still new and in my case it is used.

Like I said, I see your point of view in that by me selling a used copy of a book or giving it/loaning it to a friend I could potentially be costing the publisher a sale, but if it were truly considered piracy there would be no libraries no used book stores. Amazon would not be selling used books on its site.

i think arguing over the amount of copies is silly.

depriving copyright holders of revenue is what this is about.

Tell him to dmca chegg.com

If someone is paying for a membership, I would let them share a password with a "few" friends, any money is better then nothing. (I don't have a program, so I don't really know shit:winkwink:)

I have Netflix on four different devices with one menbership

This question was decided in 597 AD and just in case anyone was still confused it was codified in 1709. They are called COPY rights. Copyright = the right to make copies. Only the author or his assigns has the right to make copies.

Once I purchase it I can do what I want with it - other than copy it. If your friend disagrees, that's unfortunate because his side lost the court case - 1,415 years ago.

Geez it's worse than the "admins" at the hosting companies who come up with these ideas and want to do things in ways that were proven wrong in the 1970's. You lost, because you're wrong, get over it.

LOL I have to post this. Got this from someone's Facebook status:

it sort of goes with this thread... :1orglaugh

and yes, we as webmasters cry about our content, but really this thread topic has merit... and books are supposed to be free knowledge. lol hargh go the pirates hahaha

denying an author of money is not the point.

vcr denied tv producers of the ad revenue from timeshifted commercials

format shifting denied musicans the revenue from selling people 7 songs they didn't want.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

in canada writer's unions fought for royalties depending in how much your book was taken out.

uk: http://www.plr.uk.com/
canada: http://www.plr-dpp.ca/

What if you read it aloud to a class of 30 children?

There is a set of guidelines for classroom use approved by the major publishers and the teachers. It's pretty good. It recognizes the value of education and allows teachers reasonable classroom use while also protecting publishers of educational material by making it clear you're not allowed to bootleg textbooks.