|
Mel Mudkiper posted:C. Your inability to conceive of text as anything other than product and your certainty that I must be suggesting other methods of conceptualizing information in order to "steal from authors" is indicative of my point You keep saying this. You do grasp that to authors, their work is a product, right? Harping on this point just makes it look like you're trying to use the sanctity of art as a smokescreen to get free books. I understand that may not be your intention, but I can also understand why some are accusing you of prioritizing access to text over the authors' ability to earn a living via their work.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
ulvir posted:I guess next step is to claim that second hand stores and flea markets are theft too All this slippery slope stuff is pathetic. If you want to defend the Internet Archive at least have the courage to defend what they're actually doing and what these writers are upset about. They decided to turn their purported library into book Napster, where if someone ever purchased a secondhand book, the .epub was available for all without restrictions. Its functionally equivalent to Pirate Bay with the slightest gloss of 'someone once bought the book'. Actual libraries buy licenses with various DRM restrictions that attempt to replicate the usual library experience [14 days per copy, limited number of copies, etc.]. Publishers did not sue libraries because this is not theft, it is in fact the opposite of theft, which is a consensual exchange that publishers agreed to. In fact the IA also operated this way without any complaint until they decided to open their "Emergency Library" without lending restrictions. Similarly, no one will sue a secondhand store because those sales are legal and there is no legal basis to sue. No one likes DRM kludges because they are wholly artificial and appear heavy-handed. And yet they are how writers ultimately get paid. I am not sure what alternative is being proposed except the vague sense that there are enough non-thieves to make writing overall still financially possible, like with artists and Napster. Maybe! But pretending this is a moral basis for stealing is laughable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
Ornamented Death posted:You keep saying this. You do grasp that to authors, their work is a product, right? VVVVVV chernobyl kinsman posted:the problem is that the IA is an invaluable tool for researchers and anyone interested in learning about more or less anything which is being destroyed by hack writers who produce nothing of value and whose works are not even read in significant numbers by the users of the IA. so now you cant read the pdf of the zombie star wars novel, yes, but also of print and rare books become completely inaccessible
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
the "but libraries pay for it" argument is also nonsensical at any kind of scale. if a library buys an n.k. jemison book for $18, of which she receives about 1.80, and 200 people read it, her profit per read amortizes to effectively zero anyway. its a completely hollow moral argument
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Copernic posted:Actual libraries buy licenses with various DRM restrictions that attempt to replicate the usual library experience [14 days per copy, limited number of copies, etc.]. Publishers did not sue libraries because this is not theft, it is in fact the opposite of theft, which is a consensual exchange that publishers agreed to. In fact the IA also operated this way without any complaint until they decided to open their "Emergency Library" without lending restrictions. Similarly, no one will sue a secondhand store because those sales are legal and there is no legal basis to sue. If publishers didn't sue libraries because its all perfectly legal why did Movie companies sue video rental stores for doing the same thing in the 80s and game companies sue game rental stores in the 90s for doing the same thing? The fact you think libraries are protected because they do it "right" is naive. The only reason they exist is because they were a foundation of western culture before capitalism was.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Copernic posted:All this slippery slope stuff is pathetic. If you want to defend the Internet Archive at least have the courage to defend what they're actually doing and what these writers are upset about. They decided to turn their purported library into book Napster, where if someone ever purchased a secondhand book, the .epub was available for all without restrictions. Its functionally equivalent to Pirate Bay with the slightest gloss of 'someone once bought the book'. show me on this doll where IA hurt the poor self-published hacks
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
P1.) Art has a meaning to all of society and responsibilities beyond those of a "mere" consumer product. P2.) Artists have a right to make a living! P3.) How about we combine those two things? P1. P2.) Wow, calm down!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Mrenda posted:P1.) Art has a meaning to all of society and responsibilities beyond those of a "mere" consumer product. WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Copernic posted:Similarly, no one will sue a secondhand store because those sales are legal and there is no legal basis to sue. they could if they would. publishers loving hate libraries and second-hand bookstores. the academic publishing industry is the greatest example of this. there's a reason that every single textbook now comes with a one-time use code for online access and why new editions are released every single year that do nothing but change the page numbers and homework questions to make them incompatible with next year's classes publishers dont go after these businesses *in court* because they have no *legal* grounds to do so, but they are and have been doing absolutely everything they can to shut them down anyway. Mrenda posted:P1.) Art has a meaning to all of society and responsibilities beyond those of a "mere" consumer product. agreed, which is why we should abolish copyright and return to the patronage system
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH And with one sentence your entire existence on this sacred forums is summed up. Everything's a loving argument to you and if you can't find a way to attack you're lost.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
Mrenda posted:And with one sentence your entire existence on this sacred forums is summed up. Everything's a loving argument to you and if you can't find a way to attack you're lost. calm down bud
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
With all due respect, Mrenda, please shut up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:agreed, which is why we should abolish copyright and return to the patronage system There has probably legitimately been no greater boon to the arts than patreon's modernization of the patronage system, dead serious There are so many things that were not commercially viable under the publisher/advertising system of revenue including Watch this You are gonna love this BOOM https://www.patreon.com/nkjemisin BOOM https://digital.hbs.edu/platform-rctom/submission/the-death-of-the-starving-artist-patronage-via-patreon/ NK Jemisin literally makes more from patrons than she does from her publisher Mel Mudkiper fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:There has probably legitimately been no greater boon to the arts than patreon's modernization of the patronage system, dead serious Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
there's a good paper to be written about how the modern nerd's idea of "canon" is completely inseparable from and dependent upon international copyright law, which in turn is extensively shaped by the lobbying and litigious activities of DisneyMel Mudkiper posted:There has probably legitimately been no greater boon to the arts than patreon's modernization of the patronage system, dead serious agreed
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:there's a good paper to be written about how the modern nerd's idea of "canon" is completely inseparable from and dependent upon international copyright law, which in turn is extensively shaped by the lobbying and litigious activities of Disney I was actually thinking about this the other day when people are like "The new movies ruined Luke" or "the old movies ruined Vader" when talking about Star Wars as if they are not obligated to consider the prequels and sequels when enjoying the original films. Like they don't seem to understand they can just, like, ignore that the stuff they don't like even exists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
also since people might have skipped over it because it was an edit but NK Jemisin literally has a patreon because her publishing contract wasnt enough for her to live off of and this was years before IA started doing its book thing and to this day she makes more from patreon than from her publisher
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Like they don't seem to understand they can just, like, ignore that the stuff they don't like even exists. ah, now we have discovered headcanon
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:ah, now we have discovered headcanon I was reflecting the other day about how the most complete edition of the Tain Bo Cualinge was written by various monks over a period of decades and how straight up a character dies and then is alive again two chapters later because they dude writing that part forgot what the other monk wrote and was using a different oral version of the story for his part
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
I do wish that IA had done the radical step of directly financially linking the authors labor to the authors pocketbook because I crave publisher death, but that feels like I am quibbling about an overall good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
medieval lit in general is a good example of a completely alternative way of conceiving of fiction. like in arthurian stuff there's a broad consensus about certain things that happen (he gets a sword, mordred turns bad, arthur dies) but how and when those things happen are in total flux and no author gives a poo poo about agreeing with any other. even central "plot points" like the lancelot adultery are progressive developments rather than "original" canon its a much healthier and more artstically productive way of large-scale storytelling rather than the modern idea of everything having to agree (else we have "plot holes") which leads to horrific nightmares like whatever DC just did to un-reboot the new 52 and reconcile every single plot point, no matter how niche or obscure
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I do wish that IA had done the radical step of directly financially linking the authors labor to the authors pocketbook because I crave publisher death, but that feels like I am quibbling about an overall good thing. I mean, I think the big thing is that IA was explicitly free and non-profit. They weren't acting as a new form of commercial distribution, they were acting as an archive, which is the role of a library.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:its a much healthier and more artstically productive way of large-scale storytelling rather than the modern idea of everything having to agree (else we have "plot holes") which leads to horrific nightmares like whatever DC just did to un-reboot the new 52 and reconcile every single plot point, no matter how niche or obscure 100% agree and its one of the reasons why the stranglehold of copyright on characters that are, for all intents and purposes, in the public domain has created this weird bastard culture. Batman, Star Wars, Mickey Mouse, etc. are all explicitly in the realm of the public domain as it was intended to be used and the fact its still held under publisher/studio control is toxic to our civilization
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I mean, I think the big thing is that IA was explicitly free and non-profit. They weren't acting as a new form of commercial distribution, they were acting as an archive, which is the role of a library. for sure. I just wouldn't mind a quick donate here patron button linked to the entries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Batman, Star Wars, Mickey Mouse, etc. are all explicitly in the realm of the public domain as it was intended to be used and the fact its still held under publisher/studio control is toxic to our civilization
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:for sure. I just wouldn't mind a quick donate here patron button linked to the entries. I get it, but I think the concern was that by making it a financial transaction in any way it was undermining their claim to act as a repository not as a distributor
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
It’s a real tough one because the guy behind IA looks like a big epic fail and the lawyers of publishers are probably cool and wear cool suits and I think we’d be friends and talk about the other guys lame tweets also tell ur friends to spend money on things they enjoy if they can and that it is cool if people who can’t afford it get to have the experience too imo
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
What kind of loser doesn’t wanna buy more things to stack up literally every day they are fiscally capable
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
correct me if i'm wrong but i thought all the books in the internet archive library were DRM copies if they were still under copyright anyway - the only thing the national emergency library did was remove waitlists - they were still protected files that would expire in two weeks and not trivially copyable anyway the internet archive is right and capitalism kills art
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
In an ideal world, good writers would be provided a lifetime monthly salary by the state, with their works available to anyone as a physical copy bought for the cost of printing+shipping or available at libraries. Digital copies would, of course, be completely free. Bad writers would get sent somewhere they would be of more use to society, e.g. the rice paddies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
Take the plunge! Okay! posted:In an ideal world, good writers would be provided a lifetime monthly salary by the state Then we'd have this sub-forum full of "oh you read salaried writers? Well I read books that are fun!" smugberting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
3D Megadoodoo posted:Then we'd have this sub-forum full of "oh you read salaried writers? Well I read books that are fun!" smugberting. no we wouldn't because writers like brandon sanderson would be in the rice paddies
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:16
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:no we wouldn't because writers like brandon sanderson would be in the rice paddies I have no idea who that is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:also since people might have skipped over it because it was an edit but NK Jemisin literally has a patreon because her publishing contract wasnt enough for her to live off of and this was years before IA started doing its book thing and to this day she makes more from patreon than from her publisher If you scroll down to the next paragraph though Disrupting how creators make money comes with challenges, however. Patreon claims it provides creators with stability – an effective replacement for salary. However, a 2018 Graphtreon study shows that only 1,393 of creators on the platform (<2%) actually earn the 2017 minimum wage of $1,160 a month. The Patreon model works best for those who already have an established fanbase [4, 5]. Patreon’s discovery tools are not robust, so there is currently no meaningful way to build a following on the platform. This has led to some content creators arguing the Patreon isn’t actually an ideal solution to helping creators stabilize income–it’s simply a fancy payment processing platform that supports already-successful artists. [6] I would 100% love to live in a world where art was not a commercial product but I would 110% love to live in a world where artists are able to eat, and if those two ideals fall into conflict then I know what I'm backing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
wizzardstaff posted:I would 100% love to live in a world where art was not a commercial product but I would 110% love to live in a world where artists are able to eat, and if those two ideals fall into conflict then I know what I'm backing. the whole point of mel's post is that they are already in conflict because publishers pay their writers a pittance
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:36
|
|
|
wizzardstaff posted:If you scroll down to the next paragraph though Sham bam bamina! fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:38
|
|
|
tinaun posted:correct me if i'm wrong but i thought all the books in the internet archive library were DRM copies if they were still under copyright anyway - the only thing the national emergency library did was remove waitlists - they were still protected files that would expire in two weeks and not trivially copyable Yeah I am pretty sure that you are correct. Additionally if someone wanted to strip out that DRM then they could do that. But hell, it's extremely simple to strip out DRM from purchased ebooks in general so it wouldn't be the internet archive's fault.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:the "but libraries pay for it" argument is also nonsensical at any kind of scale. if a library buys an n.k. jemison book for $18, of which she receives about 1.80, and 200 people read it, her profit per read amortizes to effectively zero anyway. its a completely hollow moral argument I'm not sure how it works with books but with journal subscriptions institutions like libraries tended to pay a lot more than individual subscribers, especially for society-based publications, as a way to account for this. With the 3 or 4 big corporate publishers vacuuming up most small journals in recent years the pricing has gotten even more predatory of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I was actually thinking about this the other day when people are like "The new movies ruined Luke" or "the old movies ruined Vader" when talking about Star Wars as if they are not obligated to consider the prequels and sequels when enjoying the original films. I don't understand why people don't realize that Disney throwing out the Star Wars EU because they can means that people consuming the media can do the same with "canon" works. Read and consume what you like; no one is under no obligation to give a poo poo about things that anger them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Samadhi posted:I don't understand why people don't realize that Disney throwing out the Star Wars EU because they can means that people consuming the media can do the same with "canon" works. Read and consume what you like; no one is under no obligation to give a poo poo about things that anger them. Bingo
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:05
|
|