Difference between revisions of "Talk:956: Sharing"
The Cat Lady (talk | contribs) m |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
What is it about the digital medium that makes people feel that the hard work of others should be available to them for free? We all agree that it is wrong to steal a (physical) book from a bookstore. However, now that the tablet has been invented, authors should give away their hard work for free and write on a volunteer basis as a public service? Certainly there are problems to be resolved when Apple and Amazon are profiting disproportionately from digital sales (as compared to authors and artists), however exploitation of artists by publishers is not a new phenomenon and was never an issue for the hacker set until entertainment went digital and they had access to free stuff. There are those on-line who think that the internet should offer-up everything for free but this attitude forgets that there is a cost to creating art and if that price is not paid, far fewer art will be created.. JB. [[Special:Contributions/74.213.186.41|74.213.186.41]] 12:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC) | What is it about the digital medium that makes people feel that the hard work of others should be available to them for free? We all agree that it is wrong to steal a (physical) book from a bookstore. However, now that the tablet has been invented, authors should give away their hard work for free and write on a volunteer basis as a public service? Certainly there are problems to be resolved when Apple and Amazon are profiting disproportionately from digital sales (as compared to authors and artists), however exploitation of artists by publishers is not a new phenomenon and was never an issue for the hacker set until entertainment went digital and they had access to free stuff. There are those on-line who think that the internet should offer-up everything for free but this attitude forgets that there is a cost to creating art and if that price is not paid, far fewer art will be created.. JB. [[Special:Contributions/74.213.186.41|74.213.186.41]] 12:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | :You <i>cannot</i> compare digital copies with physical goods, they are two completely different things! "there is a cost to creating art and if that price is not paid, far fewer art will be created"; That is just so wrong I don't know where to start with a rebuttal. So you are saying the only reason people create is in order to get paid? That is complete nonsense! Humans have created art for millennia without expecting to get paid for it. You are just exhibiting a massive sense of self-entitlement. <i>Copyright</i> is what is stifling art and creativity. Copyright has engendered that sense of self-entitlement you are showing here. Not one single work has entered the public domain in the last thirty years! How is that encouraging creativity? [[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 12:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
To JB.: I think the real problem here is not the question weather or not you have to pay something in the first place, but the fact that even if you bought an e-book you are forced to read it with the Kindle. It's not like stealing a book, it's like wanting to put it on another bookshelf, read it in another room or with a new set of glasses. If you own a printed copy you can carry it around, take it on vacation, copy your favorite page and hang it on the wall, resell it at a garage sale or yes, lend it to a friend. Here the tree is prevented from doing so by DRM, even though it owns the book. (note that it says "lending is not enabled" not "copying") | To JB.: I think the real problem here is not the question weather or not you have to pay something in the first place, but the fact that even if you bought an e-book you are forced to read it with the Kindle. It's not like stealing a book, it's like wanting to put it on another bookshelf, read it in another room or with a new set of glasses. If you own a printed copy you can carry it around, take it on vacation, copy your favorite page and hang it on the wall, resell it at a garage sale or yes, lend it to a friend. Here the tree is prevented from doing so by DRM, even though it owns the book. (note that it says "lending is not enabled" not "copying") | ||
Revision as of 12:58, 23 August 2021
- What can we learn from this? - I've learned that DRM does not work (Thank you Mr. XKCD for reminding us). As with Creative Commons used by Mr. XKCD each idea should be shared as freely as possible, if it is thought out well and proves helpful to others, we will reward the author of such a great idea with riches beyond their wildest dreams (such as through Movie and Marketing rights owned by madam J.K. Rowling to got our children to read again). - E-inspired (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
What is it about the digital medium that makes people feel that the hard work of others should be available to them for free? We all agree that it is wrong to steal a (physical) book from a bookstore. However, now that the tablet has been invented, authors should give away their hard work for free and write on a volunteer basis as a public service? Certainly there are problems to be resolved when Apple and Amazon are profiting disproportionately from digital sales (as compared to authors and artists), however exploitation of artists by publishers is not a new phenomenon and was never an issue for the hacker set until entertainment went digital and they had access to free stuff. There are those on-line who think that the internet should offer-up everything for free but this attitude forgets that there is a cost to creating art and if that price is not paid, far fewer art will be created.. JB. 74.213.186.41 12:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- You cannot compare digital copies with physical goods, they are two completely different things! "there is a cost to creating art and if that price is not paid, far fewer art will be created"; That is just so wrong I don't know where to start with a rebuttal. So you are saying the only reason people create is in order to get paid? That is complete nonsense! Humans have created art for millennia without expecting to get paid for it. You are just exhibiting a massive sense of self-entitlement. Copyright is what is stifling art and creativity. Copyright has engendered that sense of self-entitlement you are showing here. Not one single work has entered the public domain in the last thirty years! How is that encouraging creativity? -- The Cat Lady (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
To JB.: I think the real problem here is not the question weather or not you have to pay something in the first place, but the fact that even if you bought an e-book you are forced to read it with the Kindle. It's not like stealing a book, it's like wanting to put it on another bookshelf, read it in another room or with a new set of glasses. If you own a printed copy you can carry it around, take it on vacation, copy your favorite page and hang it on the wall, resell it at a garage sale or yes, lend it to a friend. Here the tree is prevented from doing so by DRM, even though it owns the book. (note that it says "lending is not enabled" not "copying") Like in comic #488 which is about the disadvantages of legally buying digital music, it shows that often with these kind of digital media you have not the same possibilities and rights you are used to from "real" books and CDs, but actually less. 84.137.246.233 13:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
A question: Who is Randall referring to by naming "Mike" in the fifth panel? I thought it alluded to Mike the sentient super computer from Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, but I'm curious as to other interpretations. 108.162.214.83 09:26, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm assuming it is some kid they know called 'Mike', but perhaps my powers of deduction aren't as fearsome as I think. 108.162.219.223 23:17, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
A tree with a USB port? Maybe we should mention dead drops somewhere? Wow, and I just found this: Dead Tree Drop, I don't know if it's inspired by xkcd, but it's an awesome idea :D Klamann (talk) 12:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
I can see what the strip is trying to do, but the comparison to the original book really kind of misses the point. The tree in Silverstein's book gave of itself to the kid. Unless the tree is also Shel Silverstein, that book doesn't belong to it to give or lend. (And what's more, the book was not even available for Kindle until Feb 18, 2014, two and a half years after the strip was posted!) —Robotech (talk) 03:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- If you'll pardon the pun, I think that by taking this strip so literally you are missing the forest for the trees. Orazor (talk) 07:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems like this "Mike" is from Well 2. 108.162.216.14 20:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
the piracy tree 188.114.99.41 17:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
