On Jun 28, 2018, andrea.corelli wrote:
Hi Dana,

I apreciate your straight point. I would slightly disagree and would encourage to read the entire thread to understand the point. As described above it is technically allowed by law. Ethically I don't have the answer as clear as you have. I fear this is a gray area, regardless we like it or not.

Just to clarify: this is only an open (and I think important) exercise. I own books, downloads, DVD's and props for thousands of Euros and I am not intending to share any digital download with anyone.

Cheers!
Andrea

Assuming the above, wouldn't it be legal to sell a download to someone provided that the original owner deleted all copies of the files in their possession? If I take the download, place it on a flashdrive and sell it, and delete and copies I owned, is that any different than reselling a DVD?

On Jun 30, 2018, andrea.corelli wrote:
Hey Clown,
thanks for taking part in this discussion. You are probably right, there is no real way to protect intellectual property just yet. The only effective way is proven to be to surpass the "a la cart" model in favour of the "all you can eat" model. In this case the user would not buy a digital content, but would rather buy the service of streaming that content (along with many more) for a period of time. But what I would like to stop is on the below sentence:

Quote:

Assuming the above, wouldn't it be legal to sell a download to someone provided that the original owner deleted all copies of the files in their possession? If I take the download, place it on a flashdrive and sell it, and delete and copies I owned, is that any different than reselling a DVD?

This technically violates the copyright as you would not be allowed to change the media you buy a download from. While to me it sounds etichally correct, if you want to be strict about the pure low on the "copyright" concept, the only way to make it work is to download the file DIRECTLY onto that flashdrive, without stepping on your local hard drive before.

On Jul 4, 2018, Vater Araignee wrote:

Quote:

On Jun 30, 2018, andrea.corelli wrote:
While to me it sounds etichally correct, if you want to be strict about the pure low on the "copyright" concept, the only way to make it work is to download the file DIRECTLY onto that flashdrive, without stepping on your local hard drive before.

Unfortunately you can not bypass the hard drive, you only appear to bypass it. Just like a single processor computer can not truly multitask it only gives the illusion of multitasking through speed.

On Jul 4, 2018, andrea.corelli wrote:
This has been used in court a few times in Italy and proven to be completely acceptable on the legal front. You are not changing media. And honestly I see no technical reason why a file you are downloading onto a flashdrive directly shall pass by the HD. bits would travel to the RAM and then land directly on the Flash drive as the Operating system would not see any difference between the your HD or a flash drive or an external HD.

On Jul 4, 2018, Vater Araignee wrote:
The downloading file always goes to the drive that the operating system resides on first (unless you have manually changed it in the registry or its equivalent) either in whole or in part depending upon size and then is transferred to the designated location from there automatically, giving the illusion that it went directly to the designated location.
Now this illusion my be good enough for a court as it rightly should be, but claiming that is bypassing the drive is false.
It is a standard that hasnt changed because it is tried and true and going from ram to location would see no appreciable gains wile adding to pointlessly paying someone to change the programming.

On Jul 5, 2018, jimgerrish wrote:
What libraries have collections of e-Books?

On Jul 5, 2018, jimgerrish wrote:
What libraries have collections of e-Books?

On Jul 5, 2018, EvilClown wrote:
The public library here in Richmond, VA has its own app for allowing residents to access ebooks. Plenty of releases from the past year available to borrow through their app.

On Jul 5, 2018, Vater Araignee wrote:
Well then something is very wrong with my copy of windows 10 considering my hd usage logs show it bobbing up and down during downloads from the net to my sd cards. Anyway...

On Jul 5, 2018, Vater Araignee wrote:
If one is going to take issue with sharing the cost of digital media and call it unethical, they should also be calling libraries unethical. They wont because they are use to libraries, even though it is 1 sale with hundreds if not thousands of readers.
What about teams? Do they expect every person involved to buy their own copy of a download, dvd, book etc? 1 purchaser, multiple readers/viewers.


Lets really turn this into a truly ethical discussion.
I'll start by pointing out what ethics are not.

• Ethics are not feelings. Feelings give information for ethical choices. Some people feel bad when they do something wrong, but many people feel good when they are doing something they know is wrong. Often people feel bad doing the right thing especially if it hurts people they care for.
  
• Ethics is not religion. Many are non religious, but ethics applies to everyone. Most religions have high ethical standards but do not address all of the types of ethical problems faced.
  
• Ethics is not the law. Good laws incorporate ethical standards, but can deviate from what is ethical. It can become highly corrupt. It can be for power alone and designed to serve the interests of the few wile hurting the many. It can be difficult designing and or enforcing standards, and slow to address new problems.
  
• Ethics is not cultural norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, others are corrupt or blind to certain ethical concerns (like slavery before the Civil War). "When in Rome..." is not an ethical standard.
  
• Ethics is not science. Science doesn't tell us what we should do. Science may provide an explanation for what humans are like, but not for how humans should act. Just because something is scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to do it.
  

Now that we have fee fees, laws and norms out of the way, what ethical approach/s should be taken?

1. Utilitarian, most good least harm.
   
2. Common Good, serves the whole community not just a minority.
   
3. Rights, serves everyone with a stake.
   
4. Fairness, treats all equally.
   
5. Virtue, leads one to act as the person they want to be.

Did I miss any?

Keeping in mind what ethics isn't and using as many ethical approaches as possible, clearly explain why cost sharing is or is not ethical. Who is the victim if there is one at all?
As a personal exorcise, try to find as many and as few as possible under each type, it can make your final argument stronger because you may spot flaws you need to work out.