wedgeski said:
In any case, I think you missed my point or I didn't make it clear enough: it doesn't matter what the bottom line actually is on the costs of internet piracy, because the perceived threat is enough. Only time, and improved auditing and accounting, will truly tell. As it stands, opponents of digital rights protection will always say that piracy should just be a cost of sale; those who actually have money to lose will tend to say the opposite.
Perhaps you don't quite grasp the social implications as well as you might think - yes - perception is reality. At some point, politicians will perceive that the bad corporation is oppressing the little guy, due to political and activist pressures, and will eventually either repeal the existing new digital laws or risk their re-election chances. That point isn't here yet.
And yet they go to extreme lengths to *prevent* the theft in the first place (electronic tagging, surveillance, store detectives, etc.). You can bet that if they could categorically remove that assumed loss from their balance sheet because of fool-proof anti-theft devices, they would. Neither does the fact that it's difficult to stop imply that they shouldn't *try* (as portions of the rest of your post appear to imply).
I never said they shouldn't try - my point was that they shouldn't try if they recognize that it will be too costly to try to begin with. If your bottom line can support it, go ahead and try.
As always, I was waiting for this. I can go for the 'it doesn't represent a loss of sale' argument, but asserting that it isn't, somehow, theft, simply because you can steal the item in question without the original owner losing possession is ludicrous. It is also, as it happens, the number one Case for the Defense trotted out by casual software pirates on the 'net.
If you download and gain any utility whatsoever from a PDF, when someone else has taken the honest route and paid the creator for their work, you are a thief. You are stealing intellectual property without rewarding the creator. You are presuming upon their hard work with little or no respect for the time and expertise that goes into creating it. And by doing so, you are contributing to the perceived threat of internet piracy and forcing companies like Malhavoc to consider DRM as a necessary evil. Don't believe me? This thread speaks for itself.
You obviously didn't grasp my point about copyright - the author is not *supposed* to be rewarded for his or her work - the work is the reward in and of itself. Copyrights, despite modern laws, *still* exist to foster innovation, not to make someone an income.
Now, as to taking vs. buying - unfortunately, this seems to only apply to people and not to governments or corporations. I would buy your argument if it was fair and equitable, but too many times, governments exercise eminent domain in order to provide large corporations with a place to build a new site of some sort. In the case of a small pdf publisher, it *could* mean someone doesn't get paid if someone downloads a copy off of a website or a p2p network. Once again - it is completely impossible to say with any degree of certainty that someone making a copy hurts a company's profits.
Bathing in the glorious light of the free market, I would laugh in the face of the vendor and take my money elsewhere. But that's not what you're miffed about. You're miffed that the car salesman is the only shop in town who sells that car you want so badly, and is leveraging his position to force you to use it only on Tuesdays and Thursdays. That's just tough luck. Either live with it, or don't buy it. But do *not* sneak into his lot after midnight, steal his car, and pretend your actions are justified.
Actually, no I'm not miffed about anything. And - your analogy doesn't work. The correct analogy would be sneaking into the town next door and buying the exact car from a different dealer who didn't have any restrictions on it after you bought it - you completely missed my point - that if I buy something, no matter what it is, I have the right to do with it what I want. Heck - I can even decide to get a wrecking ball and knock my own house down, so long as I don't try to claim the insurance.
Good for you! That's completely irrelevant though, aside from the fact that your download encourages the guys who PDF and freely (or otherwise) distribute intellectual property in the first place. I did it myself with the D&D core rule books a couple of years ago though, so I have no legs to stand on there.
Actually - it isn't irrelevant - as an example - despite the RIAAs crying poor and showing selected data, if you looked at *all* of the data from CD sales, it would be completely obvious to the most casual observer that CD sales have gone up in the era of Napster and p2p networks. Of course - no one can say whether sales have gone up due to people sampling the music, due to increased personal income, or any other factor.
