Monday, September 9, 2013

Copyright is not really natural

“It ended being a reflection on the loss of long-established rights when you buy an e-book. You make a copy of that book, but at eye-level, so that the result is not a stack of paper, but another e-book.” - Peter Purgathoferauthor of the idea.  link

I'm not sure what "eye level" has to do with anything. "Long-established rights" he said, hmmmm... as in "human rights"? 

It is apparently illegal to use a program to remove code (the DRM) from a file. Or to put it another way, it is illegal to remove part of a file we may have purchased in entirety. So this guy creates a way of automating the process of taking pictures and changing those into text files. No copyright violation I guess. I can personally think of a few challenges I might make in court. And that is why he does nothing but proof of concept. Perhaps he has copyrighted his idea by doing so. Who knows?

"Digital rights" really are a kettle of fish. Technically, it must be that we own nothing but the "right" to read a file. We do not own the file. We, sort of, rent the file for a purposed usage, if that usage is of a type that is agreed upon by those leasing the file... I think.

"Copyright is sometimes called a "negative right", as it serves to prohibit certain people (e.g., readers, viewers, or listeners, and primarily publishers and would be publishers) from doing something they would otherwise be able to do, rather than permitting people (e.g., authors) to do something they would otherwise be unable to do." -Wikipedia

[ Well, that was irony... I mean, I think that was ok to copy and paste. There are lots of ins and outs to this idea, I guess.]

Libraries are, kind of, exempt from copyright law. The "free" dissemination of information leads to a more educated populace... doesn't it? Yet... if everybody used only the library for reading... well... why would authors write books in a capitalist system of reward?

What would Ayn Rand think of her books being in libraries?

Did I have an original thought in there somewhere? This sentence and previous sentences, except those
I borrowed, are: Copyright 2013 © Michael DeVore.

Usage of the name "Ayn Rand" is "Copyright © 1995–2013 Ayn Rand® Institute".  

I love that ® by her name. I always have. I'm glad I got the chance to point it out. :)