My tax dollars also pay for that municipal library, so I still don't get it.
--
Christopher
[email protected]
On 4/19/2010 12:41 PM, Frank Ventura wrote:
That was for a BARD player, either we pay it directly or through our tax
dollars.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher Chaltain
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 1:38 PM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
I'm confused. Who's paying three bills? Where's the analogy?
--
Christopher
[email protected]
On 4/19/2010 12:31 PM, Frank Ventura wrote:
OK if you don't think there is a double standard then stand in front
of
your average lending library in AnyTown USA and tell each person
coming
out with a book that they will have to spend three bills of their
paycheck (or tax dollars) to be able to read that book and watch their
reaction. Still no double standard?
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher
Chaltain
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 1:27 PM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
I don't agree. Someone else on this list talked about the more famous
RIAA law suits, and to my knowledge none of these were directed
against
blind individuals. I'm not aware of a single case where the NLS went
after a blind patron. Copy protection schemes implemented by Sony,
Apple, Audible and so on are not directed at the blind. Apple, Audible
and Overdrive content are all restricted to a certain set of players,
or
used to be, and again this has nothing to do with the blind. I don't
think there's a double standard here.
I won't even go near the recliner analogy.
--
Christopher
[email protected]
On 4/19/2010 12:17 PM, Frank Ventura wrote:
What I meant (in case there is any confusion) is that a sighted
person
can break copyright law just as easily as a blind person but they
don't
face the same restrictions as blind people do. I thought I made that
quite clear. Again I go back to the Lazyboy recliner analogy. A
sighted
lending library does not tell its patrons how they may read their
borrowed material but BARD does go that extra step with blind people
with its for profit players. The secondary and maybe far worse effect
of
this double standard is that it makes blind people appear as if we
are
more prone to piracy then the general public.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert doc Wright
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 11:02 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
Here are your words frank:
[email protected]>
To: "PC Audio Discussion List"<
[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 7:42 AM
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
You can just as easily go to your local library and photocopy a
book,
dub a audio tape or copy an overdrive book. Does the government
think
blind folks are more predispositioned to piracy than ordinary folks,
that we need such extreme measures that the rest of our culture does
not?
What did you mean by this?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Ventura"<[email protected]>
To: "PC Audio Discussion List"<[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 8:05 AM
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
Chris, I wasn't even suggesting that the local lending library would
allow you to make copies of any of their material, of course they
would
not and should not. My point was that local lending libraries make
material available to the public that is just as easily pirated as
BARD
but they don't shoehorn patrons into supporting the for profit
business
of mandatory players. That would be like going to my local lending
library and checking out a book and have them tell me that I can
only
read it while sitting in a a LazyBoy Recliner, not another brand.
But,
of course if I can't afford it, us as tax payers, would be glad to
fit
the bill for that LazyBoy.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher
Chaltain
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 9:24 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
No, but the library won't let you make copies of that book and give
them
away or sell them to others. The copy protection scheme with BARD
books
is intended to keep these books from getting into the general public
and
impacting the sales of audio books. This kind of protection is
necessary
in order to ensure cooperation with the publishers. I think the
attitude
of some on this list that once they have an MP3 in their possession
they're able to do with it whatever they want demonstrates why the
NLS
and other companies and agencies need to take such action.
Although I'm sure the vendor manufacturing the players is doing it
for
a
profit, I'm not sure how you know they're making tons of money
(whatever
that means). I also have no ideas what insentives you're talking
about.
If you're implying that kickbacks are involved then that's illegal
and
you should report that. I also don't see how the 3rd party players
are
raking in the dough from this, unless by providing this feature
they're
boosting their sales. I don't see anything wrong with that by the
way.
Christopher
[email protected]
On 4/19/2010 8:10 AM, Frank Ventura wrote:
If I walk into my local public library and check out a book the
librarian doesn't tell me which room in my house I can or cannot
read
the book in. However with BARD they restrict qualified persons as
to
which player the must use. The government is buying tons of those
new
digital players and someone is making tons of money building and
selling
them to the government and someone in said government is receiving
"incentives" to continue this practice? So does anyone not think it
is
all about money?
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of James Homuth
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 12:01 PM
To: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
BARD is under the misguided impression that, even after you
download
your
copy of a particular book, BARD still owns that copy. You have no
legal
authority to do anything, considered legal or otherwise, with that
copy.
Not
only is that incorrect, but it's also even more restrictive than
even
the
most literally interpreted copyright law. Again, I'll use my
example
of
iTunes. You pay for a couple songs from iTunjes. They're now yours.
Apple no
longer owns those copies. You can put them on your iWhatever, burn
them
to a
CD, do pretty much whatever you want with them. Not true with BARD.
And
it's
business models like that that convince people to do things you
would
call
stealing.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Ford Blackwell
Sent: April 18, 2010 11:51 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
but from Bard, which was your example, you don't have permission.
----- Original Message -----
From: "mitchell"<[email protected]>
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'"<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
That's absulootly rite, but after you qualify for the servis, and
down
load
the file you still don't return it so if this all rite then how is
tom
or
anyone who has someone's pramition to coppy a fyle then how is it
steeling?
Mitchell
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of James Homuth
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:37 AM
To: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
Apple tried to do the exact same thing with their iTunes. They
tried
limitting exactly what type of player you could put their music
etc
on
in
the same way BARD is. The reasons that didn't work are the exact
same
reasons BARD shouldn't be doing that either. If you get your hands
on
something, whether you have legal access to do so or not, you're
going
to
want to do whatever you want with that something. Either put it on
a
CD,
or
copy it to something smaller than your Victor Reader, or any
number
of
things. And if someone wants to burn that book to a CD, or do
something
else
with it that BARD has decided they're not allowed to, even though
they
have
legal access to it, people are just going to find less legal means
to
do
so.
Rather than prop up and defend an out of date business model,
people
should
be pushing companies like BARD to get caught up with the rest of
the
world
and actually give people a choice as to what to do with their
acquisitions.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Ford Blackwell
Sent: April 18, 2010 11:28 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
But with Bard, you're not permitted to share and you have to
qualify
for
their service by being blind and having a player that they
authroize.
There
is a specific exception in the copyright law for Bard and
Bookshare
type
services.
----- Original Message -----
From: "mitchell"<[email protected]>
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'"<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:17 AM
Subject: RE: It's Still Stealing
I'm with you man, if it is steeling then why is it all rite to
use
bard with the book players, because you are downloading the
books.
Then you are not giving them back. Not a problem as far as I am
concerned.
Mitchell
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of DJ DOCTOR P
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 8:09 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: It's Still Stealing
Ok, so you say, "it's still stealing."
Then you tell me, why are there still some websites that lets you
download music and audio books without having to pay anything for
it?
Yes these sites still exist, and people are downloading music and
audio books without having to pay a dime for it.
Explain that one to me, if you can!
John.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom"<[email protected]>
To:<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 6:49 AM
Subject: It's Still Stealing
It's still stealing whether or not your boss gives you
permission
to
copy it.
Tom
** Message From: DJ DOCTOR P **
High Tom,
I don't do it unless my boss gives me the green light to
do it.
If he says yes, then I do it.
But if he says no, then it doesn't happen.
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
