Re: 'Free Culture' Advocate May Pay High Price

Before launching into the usual rant, the first thing that occurs to me is "oh, darn, it was JSTOR." JSTOR is available to me, and to anyone with a Boston public library card, at no cost online via the Boston Public Library electronic resources. It's one of my favorite and most-frequently-used databases. And due to funding cuts they've had to cut back and I no longer have access to the one that used to be my biggest favorite, the page images of the New York Times back to 1857.

I fear that the flap will in some manner result in JSTOR being denied to BPL library patrons.

Now, the rant. One of the things that is becoming more and more clear to me is that regardless of the current state of the law, the general public makes a very clear bright-line distinction between the rights and wrongs of copying, and the bright line is based on whether the copy is sold for money. 

"Everyone" believes that it's OK to make a copy for a friend. 

"Everyone" believes that it's wrong to make copies for resale. 

This belief is so strong and widespread as to deserve the status of "common law." People make this distinction on the basis of a strongly-held intuitive sense of right and wrong. They are not expressing a technical opinion on how the courts interpret "securing for limited Times to Authors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings," they just think it must be OK to make a copy as long as you don't sell it.

As a corollary, "everyone" believes that fit and finish are an indicator of intent, i.e. a DVD-R in a generic sleeve with the title scribbled in Sharpie is one thing, and a DVD in a DVD box with a professional-looking printed label on the box is another.

And I think it would be a Good Thing if the creative community lined up on the side of "everyone."

I admit that there are grey areas, as in this case where there is a systematic attempt to conduct free redistribution on a large scale. But let's get real, does anyone honestly think either Mr. Swartz is going to make a penny, _or that JSTOR is going to lose a penny_ as a result of his actions? The chief victim is likely to be legitimate users of JSTOR, like me, as it gets locked up tighter and possibly will no longer be within my reach as a BPL cardholder.



 

------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Post a message:   ebook-community [[at]] *
Unsubscribe:      ebook-community-unsubscribe [[at]] *
Switch to digest: ebook-community-digest [[at]] *
Switch to normal: ebook-community-normal [[at]] *
Put mail on hold: ebook-community-nomail [[at]] *
Administrator:    ebook-community-owner [[at]] *

(* == yahoogroups.com)
-------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    ebook-community-fullfeatured-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    ebook-community-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/