[Slight OT] TDPL in Russia

[retard]

Fri, 27 Aug 2010 15:03:29 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:36:44 -0400, retard <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:35:32 +0400, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
>>
>>> Author may not lose anything, but she actually doesn't gain what she
>>> could, so yes, this is stealing. Pirates steal profit (and often
>>> prestiege as well), profit that may have paid off spent time, nerves
>>> and money. And torrent user is not guaranteed to buy the book if
>>> *able* to download a .pdf as well. It doesn't stimulate authors to
>>> share more of their thoughts and knowledge when they see all their
>>> efforts are simply taken away without any kind of thanks. A book is
>>> not a car, you don't need to read it ALL before buying, and most
>>> modern authors and publishers provide samples so potential reader may
>>> see if the book is worth buying (btw, a whole chapter of TDPL was
>>> recently provided for all willing), so I don't see any reasons for
>>> advertisement here.
>>
>> Do you think the libraries also steal from the authors? If I can't
>> afford a book or don't find it important enough, I can ask the local
>> library to order it and later read it for free. This also encourages
>> other member of the target audience to loan the book without
>> paying--the libraries have lists of most recent books and all kinds of
>> enthusiastics subscribe to those lists. This is also a great way to
>> introduce new readers to a topic. I've noticed that books I order get
>> lots of attention after they're available from the shelves.
> 
> No, libraries don't steal, they buy their copies or are given books that
> other people have bought.  If I lent you my copy of TDPL then it
> wouldn't be stealing either, someone paid for that book.  If you have a
> copy of a book from the library, then nobody else has that copy.  This
> falls under fair-use.  You are allowed to transfer your copy of IP to
> someone else (despite what EULA's try to enforce), or lend it to them as
> long as you are not also using it.  There is a difference between
> copying and lending.

Assume the library bought the damn book and someone always provides 
copies of the books online. In that case it really doesn't make any 
difference financially if I lent it or downloaded from the web and 
destroyed the copy. In either case the author gets as much/little money 
assuming that reading the book doesn't break it too badly. Those people 
who reason about the problem this way wouldn't buy the book in any case.