J.K. Rowling Forces E-Book Readers To Become Pirates
from the moving-on dept
There probably aren't many pre-teens toting Sony e-book readers around, but any that are out there are out of luck if they want to download the next Harry Potter book to it. Once again, J.K. Rowling, the series' author, has nixed the idea of offering a digital version of the book, in part out of fears of piracy. Of course, the last time a Harry Potter book was released, a group of people were able to assemble a digital version of the book within 12 hours of its release. There's no doubt that the same will happen this time, meaning that avid e-book readers will have no choice but to download a pirated version. Even with this, it's hard to imagine that piracy would result in any meaningful dent in sales. The majority of readers will still want to read the physical version, and at 700 pages (or whatever it is), it's far too big for parents to print it out for their kids. Here's where we'd normally say something about how even if there were some piracy, it could help the book gain a wider audience, but since we're talking about Harry Potter, most people have probably already been exposed to the series.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Can someone please explain...
For instance the same book ("Eats shoots and leaves") can be purchased at Amazon for $8.80 + shipping for the paperback or $13.57 + shipping for the hardback (free shipping for a $25+ order), but it costs $11 to buy in ebook format?
Let's see... production charges are less, overheads are less, fewer trees are hurt (though a lot of electrons are terribly inconvenienced), there are far fewer middlemen involved and the product is locked down in a way that a physical copy is not. Yet they expect us to pay roughly the same?
err... no thanks.
I would pay up to $5 for an e-book; less if it was DRM protected. That's almost pure profit, but it is apparently not enough for Big Media. But it is the market, not the publishers, that decide the price... and I believe that is the main reason why e-books have not taken off.
The publishers seem to think that just because something is "new technology" that we should and would pay more for it. No... "It's the content, stupid!"
Many years ago, I e-mailed Terry Pratchett and asked him if his books were available in e-book format. I got a three word reply. "I hope not!" I guess that says it all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wtf.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yo Ho me harties!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
forces them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bullshit
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I have never
I still to date have never read one of the books, not even one page.
I have never seen any of the movies either.
HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No choice? Forced?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The All White World of Harry Potter
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Harry Potter?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who is stupid?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If that mans they can't read an E-Book, they they can't read an E-Book.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lame
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The All White World of Harry Potter
In the 7th book.
Who else did you think would kill Harry?
/troll
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: forces them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No choice? Forced?
you can create content, but you can't control what people do with it. this is the original DRM argument all over again. It is not forcing people to become pirates, it's not giving them an alternative if they wish to have the book in ebook format. the only difference of piracy here is
whether people know how to OCR the book themselves vs a group of people working together to distribute it to others.
if a brand name of clothing had an agreement that you can only wear their blue jeans with XYZ shoes, shirt, sock, (which they sell as well), would you allow that? in addition, can it be enforced and/or would you follow such a rule even post-purchase? this is DRM lock-in equivalency right there.
if that sounds rediculous, think of it the same way with the book. such an issue represents a lack of foresight on rowling's part and/or their editors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So funny
Personally, I won't pirate the book since I can't wait 12 hours for it to come out, but I do weep that J.K. Rowling is putting herself into a position of being lost with the coming digital age. Books are going digital, within my lifetime I bet you won't even be able to buy a paper book anymore.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Personally, I feel that physical books are excellent for reference material, but are too bulky to read cover-to-cover as in the case of a novel. My old trusty iPaq is with me at all times, where a book wouldn't be. Because of this, I have purchased all of the Harry Potter books so far, and then found a "free" ebook that someone scanned in from the printed book to actually read on my iPaq, or laptop, or whatever else happened to be in front of me when I had a few minutes to read. The purchased hardcopy? It sits on my shelf in pristine condition, only opened to check the validity of the downloaded ebook. And when I lose my digital copies and backups someday, the physical book will likely still be there.
Unfortunately, I'm also a collector of sorts, and get some satisfaction from seeing the physical object on the shelf next to its related objects. That's something that is difficult if not impossible to duplicate with digital content.
What's worse? "Pirating" a digital copy of a book I already own or have ordered and actually reading it, or not having enough time in the proper setting to even finish reading the first physical book and therefore not buying the rest of the books in the series at all?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JK Roling Force E-Book Readers To Become Pirates
[ link to this | view in thread ]
OCR and sheet feeder scanner
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: forces them?
It also has nothing to do with her being greedy or how much money she has. She worked hard to write her books, and she deserves to make as much money as possible. What's with the thought that once you have X number of dollars, then you have enough? That's just stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Laws Force People To Life of Crime??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Waaaaaahhhhhh!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If you're rich gimme your goods for free??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: forces them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So funny
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The All White World of Harry Potter
Hogwarts has Indian students (Patel sisters), black students (Angelina for example), as well as other non white students. What makes you think it is an all white school?
Btw, what does this have to do with the asinine comments about people being forced to download pirated copies of Harry Potter? Obviously no one is forced to download anything. People choose to download pirated copies. They could always just buy the book, the audio book, or decide not to read the book altogether.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
terminolgy
JKR isn't going to ppl's houses putting a gun to their head, and saying "become a pirate" But she is taking away what someone would purchase.
So, if i get all of my books via e-book services, in order to HP7, i'll need to become a pirate. in essence, you are forced to be a pirate if you want an e-verion of HP7. it's my choise...blah blah blah...if i want an e-version, why should i buy the hard copy, rip it apart, scan all *00s of pages, then assemble in .txt, .doc, .pdf or whatever e-format is used then transfer it to the e-reader? so, i am forced to take the easy way out to get my end result.
I don't get why not release a digital copy. It seems that if you purchased 1 HP book, you'd purchase the other 6. i mean, why buy season 2 and 3 of a 7 season DVD series? it seems that many people won't just pick up book 7 because it's HP w/o knowingthe rest of the storyline. why do that?
it seems jkr dropped the ball on here.
and to the guy who said ebooks>physical, i must ask...is it that hard to read a real book? i mean the eye strain i get from looking at a computer screen all day just kills me. I don't want to have to hold a "laptop" to read a book.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Harry Puppet and the Illogical Time Machine
bananas grow on banana trees. monkeys eat bananas. therefor monkeys also eat banana trees. wait, no thats not it.
cars drive on asphalt roads. big machines pave ashpalt roads. therefor, cars also drive on big paving machines. no, thats not it either.
ok. i have it.
content providers want to sell you content but only understand paper books, DVDs and CDs. content purchasers want to spend lots of $$$ on this content but also own [iPods, eReaders, computers, PVRs, Zunes, broadband phones, et al]. content providers sue/punish content purchasers for not buying paper, DVD or CD.
hmmm... no. dont have it right... thats just as dumb as the first two examples.
Oh, well. Maybe if i throw my computer out the window, pull out my brother manual typewriter, reattach my rotary phone, and call home to make sure my wife is cooking me a big dinner after cleaning the house, i can pretend we still live in the 50's just like the content providers :P
-regards
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: forces them?
I think reality was knocking on your door, not mine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
idiots
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: forces them?
Doesn't anyone realize that the majority of all techdirt headlines are sarcastic? Half of our comments are focused on the word "force".
Digital books might become more common in the future, but it's going to take a very very long time before they stop publshing paper books and newspapers. Too many people, computer-savvy or not, enjoy reading from non-digital devices. It will be this way for years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Close to home
We were late to the Harry Potter scene. The kids, checked the books out from the library, thus robbing the publisher. We, downloaded a pirated ebook version. Thus robbing the publisher again in much the same manner.
When the new book comes out. We buy a hardcover copy, the kids take turns reading...and we still download a copy to read for ourselves.
I would pay a reasonable amount for an ebook version. I will NOT go out and buy a paper version for myself to read. I am much more likley to check out a book from a library. They should realize.
Library - Free
Ebook - $2.00 - $5.00
Used $.25 - $3.00
Paperpback $5.00 - $20.00
Hardcover $10.00 - $50.00
An ebook should be priced more than a used book but less than a new paperback. Because if the ebook is not available or costs to much. I think most folks are more likely to go for a used book or a library book, than to pay for a new paperback.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: forces them?
J.K. Rowling's decision makes pirating the more attractive option - which is ironic, because "concern about online piracy" is one of the reasons she nixed e-books in the first place.
The core issue is: if corporations offer a commodity that people want, they can then make money off that commodity. If corporations refuse to offer a product due to a fear of somehow losing control of said product - well then, that encourages a "black market" in the form of p2p.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
OCD Much, Children?
Irrespective of the merits of the criticism, repeating it twenty times is a bit spastic, eh? Pop a Paxil and go get onanistic over the latest pronouncement from Steve Jobs about DRM, OK?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: terminolgy
It's not that it's hard to read or hold a real book, it's that it's much less likely for me to carry a leisure book around with me when I already have a backpack full of stuff needed for work and school. Especially if we're talking about a lengthy Harry Potter book. My time at home is pretty much limited to taking care of my son and sleeping, neither of which I would give up to read a book. That leaves me with some time at lunch, in between meetings, and before class to squeeze in a few pages of fantasy-land fun.
Somehow, I've escaped the eye strain thing, and I sit in front of a computer for a large majority of the day. I'm either lucky or slowly going blind without realizing it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Forced piracy? You're kidding, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What about fair use?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nick's Slick Pick
You are so correct! When everyone had LPs, they wasted our time with that stupid CD format. And when there were more VCRs than actual households, that useless DVD was released.
And now they're doing that empee3 thing...who wants to buy another device to listen to music that you can only get from a computer?!?
eBooks are dead and always will be, and when this stupid internet fad goes away, we won't have to read about them ever again!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Can someone please explain...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What about fair use?
When you buy a book, you are not buying the copyright to the story/content of the book, as a general rule. Therefore, without legal ownership of the copyright, you do not have the right to "do anything you want" with the content. This confusion about what exactly is purchased when someone "buys" a device, such as a bound collection of paper and cardboard with various and diverse inks, is the maliciosness I mentioned earlier. Malicious marketers don't want consumers to believe they are buying a limited product; malicious consumers don't want to think they are buying a limited product and malicious reporters don't want either side to think.
This isn't rocket science. If you didn't buy the copyright then then you don't own the content; the content is not the product that is created by copyright law. If you don't own the content then you cannot do anything you want with it. If, however, you own the copyright then it is exactly like a chair from a marketplace perspective. What I mean is that the product can bought and sold, there by establishing a value. It can also be leased, thereby expanding its potential value. Fair use expands what you can do with "leased" copyright; that is content contained in various data retention devices like books. However, Fair Use covers non-commercial use when applied to the entire product and commercial use when applied to a part of the product. It does not enable commercial use when applied to the entire product. Distribution by individuals not profitting by the distribution is not clearly stated, nor as I understand it , clearly ruled on by existing case law.
So the question "Would some one be considered a pirate if they bought the hard copy, and then downloaded the digital?" is probably. As I understand it shifting content from one data storage device to another is allowed under Fair Use regardless of the form of the original device so long as it is for personal use. It is the distribution of shifted content that is questionable, as well as the amount of a single type of storage device the content is shifted to. For instance, digitizing the latest Harry Potter book on your computer, then transferring to a reader and a cd/dvd for backup would be ok. Transferring it to twenty readers or cd/dvds would probably be considered intent to distribute and thereby a commercial use. Putting the digitized content on a secured download site that only 5 people are authorized to use might not be considered commercial unless it has paid ad space on it, then it would, I believe, definately be considered commercial use. Piracy has been expanded to include distribution of copyright/product without due recompense to the copyright owner and/or with out the owner's permission.
Mike is right though, that copyright ownership is fundamentally different from other types of ownership. First; while you cannot "lease" a chair to multiple consumers at the same time, you can do this with copyright. Secondly, and I think more importantly, ownership of a chair is not stripped away from you, without any sort of due compensation, after a set amount of time has passed. In my opinion this loss of ownership is what causes such fierce possiveness of copyright while it is in effect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Physics guy has it right, and dorpus has it wrong
A paper book is so much more convienient than an e-book for those who don't carry laptops with them. since there are computers wherever I need one, I don't need a laptop, so rather than carry an expensive and heavey e-book reader, I can just carry the book. This does not go flat, and is less annoying when reading on the bus/train than an e-book would be, especially when the train is crowded. and you have to stand. also, paper books are more convienient for just sitting in a chair and reading, and are cheaper. ANd, yes, I do read books, and long ones (I have rad Rings many times, and War and Peace, and several Tom Clancy books, so I do not jst read short books either, for those that made that comment about other posters).
Tre are two other black charecters in HP, Liegh Jordan and Kingsley Shackelbolt (but he is not at Hogwarts, he is the Aurour in charge of hunting Sirius, but is in the ORder). Hagrid, Moony Bill Weasley, and Fleur Delacour (should it be spelt de LaCour?) are not pure human, (nor is Olympe Maxime, but she appears to have been a minor charecter), and Firenze and Grawp, Kreacher, and Dobby are all not human, although all the part humans so far have been white. Cho Chang is Chinese.
Therefore, dorpus, you have made another of your stupid comments, since there are, in the year above Harry two balcks in gryfindor and a chinese in Ravenclaw, and in Harry's year there are the Patil (with an I) twins in Gryffindor and Ravenclaw, as well as there being black wizards in the Order f the Pheonix. THere are several forgien wizards at the world cup, but there does not appear to be any blacks in the Death Eaters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
they ARE forcing us...
the public wants content A in format C
corporations are offering content A in format A and B, but no format C
so all those people who want format C have to look elsewhere to get it, which is the problem
same goes with all pirated content, it's simply not being offered in the format people desire, and thus, people go elsewhere to find it. if they offered it so us in the format we want, people would buy it.
need an example? AllofMP3.com which does huge sales for non-DRMed downloadable content.
so until they give the customer the content they want in the format they want it, we are being forced to find it elsewhere, legal or not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Naah...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Socialism? Hardly.
In fact, it sounds like Libertarianism.
The essence of this thread is that people who want their books in an electronic format - and don't mind paying for it - are being told that they cannot have it. It is not about people who are after something for nothing - they can get that right now!.
When the mediacorps rewrite copyright law, the banks rewrite finance law, the credit-card companies rewrite bankruptcy law and RIAA has the FBI doing their dirty work for them... you have CORPORATE socialism. Perhaps you should direct your comments at them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You don't need a laptop
Either weighs less than a paperback and holds the equivalent of a shelf full of books.
Even my (non-geek) wife reads e-books and prefers them to printed ones.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Socialism? Hardly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: OCD Much, Children?
"While the headline is a tad sloppy (hey, YOU try maintaining a site as extensive as Techdirt), e-book readers DON'T have a legitimate way of enjoying the HP series."
First off, regarding "a site as extensive as Techdirt". LMAO.
Techdirt is far from extensive. They have a crew of a half-dozen whiney-nosed geeks trying to write a total of maybe a dozen three-paragraph blog-style "articles" every day. Most of it is regurgitate of what I see on Slashdot, David Pogue's CIRCUITS out of the NY Times, Wired, and whatever seems to be coming out of Google News. If any of the techdirt writers put more than 15 minutes' effort into writing any one of their "articles", given their weak writing style, then they are making a horrible waste of their time. Most of it doesn't even appear edited, it just looks like a stream-of-consciousness brain dump, and for all I can tell, Techdirt writers appear to do all their writing from laptops on the loo as a way to distract themselves from their constipation, a wild-a$$ guess that only makes sense only because it would explain their incessantly-grumpy demeanor.
Second, "e-book readers DON'T have a legitimate way of enjoying the HP series."
No. E-book readers don't have a CONVENIENT way to enjoy the HP series. Several posters above have already pointed out you can scan the book in yourself. That's legitimate. But legitimacy is not your concern. CONVENIENCE is. Just as the original Techcrap writer is only FORCED to pirate if they believe their CONVENIENCE to be some god-given right instead of a privilege.
As to the above idiot who started listing out prices of alternate ways to get books, such as libraries being FREE and used bookstores being 25 cents or so, you sir are a moron. Part of the reason why people buy books is because there is a time-limited factor. True fans of the series want to read the series for themselves as soon as they can, for various reasons. One of those reasons is that they want to read the book and to discover how it turns out so that the plot of the book is not spoiled by others conversing about the book. One of those reasons is that they want to read the book so that they CAN converse with others about the book. If you want to do that during the time when most of the other people are talking about the book, then you have a limited time window after the book's release in order to get a copy of the book and to read it.
The library book is not free. The library pays the same price as anyone else for the book. Yes, the library then shares the book, but so can anyone else who shares the book, and that is perfectly legal. The difference is that when you buy a copy, you only have one copy, and unless you make your own copy of the book, digital or otherwise, then you only have one copy to share. It is the copying of the book which copyrights protect. The library book, or the legitimately loaned personally-purchased book, when shared out, of course do not need to cost anything to those to whom the book is shared. But in practice, even this analogy fails. Libraries make a good deal of money in late fees when shared books are not returned according to a schedule. So in that sense, anyone who is paying a late fee of even a few cents on the book is not getting a "FREE" copy of the book. Furthermore, most libraries purchase the books for the community based at least in part on government funding from taxes collected by the community. Meaning, even if I don't pay to check out a copy of Harry Potter from my library, I've already paid for some small fractional portion of the book in my taxes. Note this is also true -- I'm paying for the book even if I *DON'T* check it out. Also, because libraries only buy a limited quantity of books, not every person who wants the book in that limited post-release window is going to be able to get a copy of the book from the library in a timely enough fashion in order to meet their wants.
The used bookstore scenario is even more ridiculous because here you ARE paying for the book, but generally you can't walk into a used bookstore on the day of a book's release, or even the WEEK of a book's release and expect to be able to pick up a copy of the latest Harry Potter book. True, in some cases, used bookstores supplement their used selections with new selections, but in those cases, you're buying the book retail the same as you would at any other bookstore, so I'm not considering those purchases as "used" because they're in fact new books as part of a new-bookseller side-business inside the used-bookseller sales model. At best, if a rabid fan buys the book at midnight on release night, reads it during the next 24 hours, and then somehow despite being a rabid fan, decides to SELL their prized book to a used bookstore, you could argue that it is POSSIBLE for a person to get a copy used a day or so after its release. But still not ON the day of the release. If you want that, then the used-bookstore model is not reliable. Furthermore, the previous timeline is as compressed as possible, and is much more compressed than is likely. Often the people who buy the books retail on the first few days are the ones who will keep the books to re-read again and again. The ones who are less committed to the series will wait a while and pick up the new book at some point that is convenient to them, and then will take longer to read the series than the rabid fans, and only then will they decide to unload the book at some used bookstore. And people don't unload just one book at a time at a used bookstore typically -- they decide they have too many paperbacks and then they take a box over. So it might be MONTHS before some casual reader who purchased a Harry Potter book in the second or third week of release actually decides to take it to the bookstore. Moreover, the books available at release date are not paperbacks, but hardbacks. So the devout readers of the series pay a premium to keep a higher-grade book that they will keep, simply because they know they are making a long-term purchase and not just buying a casual book that they will discard after reading. So in most cases, the idea of seeing a Harry Potter book in a used bookstore takes even LONGER because you not only have to wait until after the release date, but after the PAPERBACK release date, which is often much later.
As to the arguments that ebooks are so much more expensive blah blah blah. I can't say for certain because not enough details were given, but I'd say it is likely that you are comparing the PAPERBACK price to the E-BOOK price. If you look at the original hardback price along with the e-book price, you'd see the price difference makes much more sense. E-books should be cheaper -- well they ARE often cheaper than the hardbacks.
Also, all of you idiots who jump to the Luddite accusation of books vs. e-books, it's funny how much of Techdirt is also complaining about the lack of a paper trail on voting machines. And how much of Techdirt is also complaining about how the media companies are FORCING you to pay as you switch from one media to another, as in the case of paying for a record on LP, then cassette, then CD, then iTunes.
BOOKS ARE THE ORIGINAL PAPER TRAIL OF OUR SOCIETY. When I buy a book, I know that the copy I purchase will be good for many, many years if I keep it in good shape. I personally own a few books more than a hundred years old that are in very readable shape, and dozens of books that are more than 50 years old which are in excellent condition. I have every reason to believe that if I buy a book today, if I have the desire to keep it long enough, my great-grandchildren could still read the same book a hundred years from now.
BOOKS ARE THE ORIGINAL PLAIN-VANILLA FORMAT AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FREE FROM DRM SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT DIGITAL. All you wuss boys lured by the "sexiness" of e-book technology are laughable as you say you're forced to pay to upgrade formats. No one can guarantee that the e-book, the PDF, or even the plain-vanilla ASCII text document you have now will be able to be read even ten years from now, let alone a hundred. Even if the format is still valid, or convertible to another format, you still have to store the electronic image somewhere on some medium, and to preserve it as mediums change you will have to transfer it from one medium to another. From the hard drive on your computer, to an SD card on your palm pilot, to an archive of your books on a network drive, to an internet web site hosting the archive of your books, and when that site or archive expires or no longer meets your needs, to transfer things to another site. And then yes you still need to be able to read whatever data you transferred -- leading you back to the format question again. And yes, plain vanilla ASCII text will likely be valid as a format for many many years to come... And for things like Harry Potter which have no pictures, charts or diagrams, reformatting plain vanilla ASCII text into something prettier is trivial for a book-reader... But it is a much more complicated process if the book is technical in nature and has diagrams, pictures and the like which add to the content. Sure you can have captions and footnotes and numbered diagrams, but there is a benefit to having a layout which puts the diagrams on the same page as the relevant text.... something that is not always easily done in pagination functions of more complicated programs ... and certainly which is not within the limits of a standard ASCII text file. (And yes, you can save it as XML and hope that will be around a bazillion years hence, but then you're just betting the farm on that format.)
And here's the REALLY REALLY REALLY funny thing. BOOKS CAN BE SHARED BY ANYONE.
Sure you can copy the e-book to a bazillion friends, and it's perfectly free to anyone who has an e-book reader of that format. But guess what? I can buy Harry Potter as a book, and if I want to loan it to a friend, I can just give it to them. I don't have to worry about if they have a reader that can read that format. Sure I could give my reader to my friend too, but in my case my reader is a palm smartphone, and how likely am I to loan my entire phone and organizer to a friend for a week or two while they read the book? Not at all. And then there's the actual - *GASP* - SOCIAL - yes SOCIAL function of books that exists because of their sharability. I pick up a copy of a book in an airport as something to occupy my time on a long plane flight. The book has a cover that gives some depiction of its content, at least title and author generally. A person sitting nearby me on the plane might see the cover and talk to me about it. They could not have done that if I was just hitting the scroll button on my smartphone; they would have had no idea if I was reading a book or if I was playing a game or writing an email for work. So a book provides a certain social approachability, which might be appalling to the privacy-freak antisocial geek crowd, but which has considerable appeal for anyone social. And the physical nature of the book just makes it more socially flexible. If the person on the plane is a cute chick that's just asking about the book as a way to start up a conversation, heck not only can I give her the book but I can write whatever I want in the book, too. Sure maybe you could edit the e-book somehow and pass it on as a file IF she had the right e-book reader, but that's soooo impersonal and geeky, whereas YOUR book with YOUR handwriting in her hands is a much more tangible reminder of your meeting. And all of those social possibilities are not even considering the legions of people who buy books and then regularly violate their sanctity by writing in the books, in the margins and in between the lines, either ideas that they have from reading the books, or other thoughts that come to mind. This is not so true with fiction, but is very true with people who regularly buy non-fiction books, especially books with a training or instructional nature to their content.
The idea that Techdirt and its lemming-minded wave of commentators does not immediately GET or understand any of this underscores Techdirt as Techcrap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: terminolgy
Because that's the only legal way to do it.
so, i am forced to take the easy way out to get my end result.
No. You aren't. You *CHOOSE* to take the easy, unethical, immoral, and illegal way out. So would I... but frankly I hate e-books. Paper or audio, please.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So funny
I really hope not, I would hate to sit and read a book off my computer. Theres nothing like just sitting down outside with my cozy paper back and enjoying the sunshine. even just the feel of a physical book is part of the experience of reading. Im old fashioned this way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Can someone please explain...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is not fair
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This stinks people so badly want to read this book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This stinks people so badly want to read this book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This stinks people so badly want to read this book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This stinks people so badly want to read this book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This stinks people so badly want to read this book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The All White World of Harry Potter
First of all, the school is not an international school. It caters to witches & wizards from the UK and surrounding (Ireland, Scotland, etc).
Second....
Dean Thomas: Black
Patil Twins: Indian
Angelina Johnson: Black
Students from Durmstrang: Eastern European
Students from Bauxbaton: French
and there are quite a few others....
It's not an All White world of Harry Potter. Read before you speak.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The All White World of Harry Potter
I would call that a quite colorful world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The All White World of Harry Potter
I would call that a quite colorful world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: bullshit
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: bullshit
[ link to this | view in thread ]