It is very doubtful that eSnips will affect books in the same way that P2P has changed music.

People like real books very much more than just a download. If this were not the case, then you would find the P2P networks filled with books. So is this the case?

Doing a quick search on some P2P* networks, for any .pdf's (probably the most common file format for a book) I find a few hacker books (for example the Lyons book), some political writings, of course, bunches and bunches of pornography, but very few books.

So, upon reflection, I rather doubt that any author is going to be hurt here. Yes, you may be able to scare some into believing that they will be hurt.

This observation is key because you are doubtless about to propose some 'solution' to this problem of eSnips like making it illegal, or throwing anyone who discusses the underlying technology in jail. Or perhaps you are just trying to garner support for throwing people who upload files into jail for several years. But, those are really extreme solutions, much worse than the problem they are trying to 'solve'.

What would happen though, if those who are funding IP Central got their way with the radical IP maximalization? I suspect that, through democratic processes, many IP protections that exist today would disappear. That's in part why the RIAA has quietly decreased their lawsuits against grandmothers police-state tactics.

My advice to content holders would be to adopt a low profile.

*I use my P2P client to help distribute linux and some other free software, which is (still) legal, and non-infringing

There are a couple of points that go unaddressed in Enigma Foundry's post.

1. The Digital Millennium Act makes the posting and sharing of digital content illegal.

Don't quite know how much clearer you can get. It's like calculus. It is what it is. ILLEGAL. For the uninitiated, digital media (electronic files) doesn't disintegrate at the same rate of speed that a paperback does. If one has a digital file and one continues to move that file to new storage media as technology advances, the digital book has an incredibly LONG life span. Digital works are also easily shared multiple times at the same moment, whereas a paperback is a one-at-a-time loan to ONE person.

2. While it's true that eBooks aren't "currently" as popular as the paperback variety, don't fool yourself into thinking that the paperback and the hardback will always reign supreme. As our society becomes more technologically advanced and eBook readers get better and better, eBooks will eventually play a major part in the entertainment industry.

3. The fact that one can distribute Linux and other free software legally and non-infringing is because those companies/persons encourage the FREE sharing and distribution of their software to those who want it. As an author, I DO NOT and HAVE NOT granted permission to anyone to offer my books for free on any server.

4. As for solving the problem. Buy the book instead of assuming that there's no harm being done to those of us who are working hard to make a name for ourselves in the writing world.

And as to your comment "So, upon reflection, I rather doubt that any author is going to be hurt here. Yes, you may be able to scare some into believing that they will be hurt."

Let me give you a little insight into the financial world of a writer just starting out in the business. I write full-time and work a day job full-time. I work about 50hrs a week on writing and 40hrs on the day job. I get about 5-6hrs sleep during the week. Not a complaint, simply the facts.

My annual take home pay from the day job is $47,000. Last year I made $2,800 off my writing.
I write because it's my love, my passion, but I'm also in it to make a living so that I can eventually quit the day job. I can't do that if people steal my books and distribute them for everyone else in the world to read for free.

It's a mistake to think that every author earns incredibly amounts of money and can afford to let some petty thievery slide. There are a GREAT many authors who WILL most certainly be hurt by this continued practice of distributing books in digital format without paying for them.

Monica Burns

Monica, this is a fantastic post. Thank you for sharing the economics of a hard-working writer who aspires to do it for a living. There is nothing wrong with that aspiration, and it's not appropriate for people who want content without paying for it to make it more difficult for you to do so. (And I don't want to hear anyone say they'll only download books they wouldn't buy; if you're not willing to pay for it, why do you want to read it? And as others posted on The Growing Threat, we have libraries.)

And yes, any free open-source software is free because the creators chose to do it that way. I give my writings away free here at my think tank, but that does NOT mean I should force you to do the same.

>

Perhaps you could enumerate at least one then?

>

No, the posting of copyrighted content was illegal before the DMCA, and will be illegal after the DMCA has been consigned to same bin as the Alien and Sedition Act.

The DMCA has however been used to prevent a Scientist from presenting a paper at a conference, and to arrest a programmer for figuring out how certain software worked.

The DMCA was also used by Diebold in their attempt to suppress certain leaked internal memos which documented flaws in their e-voting machines.

The DMCA also, perversely has created a safe harbor for You Tube and ESnips, which could have been prosecuted more aggressively before the DMCA.

>

Well, perhaps that day will come, in some hypothetical future, but, keeping or discusion in the here and now, you acknowledge that books “reign supreme”

>

However, through the use of the DMCA and other heavy handed laws institutions such as PFF are trying to remove the legality of P2P technology which I use to distribute linux.

>

And have your works appeared on these “servers”? If so, you can just send a take down notice.

>

I agree with that advice, and find it strange that you would even make such an obvious comment. However, I do not support erosion of my First Amendment rights to make someone's business plan work out. The following Benjamin Franklin quote would be appropriate here:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

>

And how is any of this relevant? You have not shown any damages, or that you are affected in the least. As an Architect, I, too, have in the past made sacrifices for what I believe is a noble profession. (Refer again to the Benjamin Franklin quote.)

Sorry about two posts, the IP Central did not like html, so I am reposting plain text..

“There are a couple of points that go unaddressed in Enigma Foundry's post.”

Perhaps you could enumerate at least one then?

“1. The Digital Millennium Act makes the posting and sharing of digital content illegal.”

No, the posting of copyrighted content was illegal before the DMCA, and will be illegal after the DMCA has been consigned to same bin as the Alien and Sedition Act.

The DMCA has however been used to prevent a Scientist from presenting a paper at a conference, and to arrest a programmer for figuring out how certain software worked.

The DMCA was also used by Diebold in their attempt to suppress certain leaked internal memos which documented flaws in their e-voting machines.

The DMCA also, perversely has created a safe harbor for You Tube and ESnips, which could have been prosecuted more aggressively before the DMCA.

“2. While it's true that eBooks aren't "currently" as popular as the paperback variety, don't fool yourself into thinking that the paperback and the hardback will always reign supreme...”

Well, perhaps that day will come, in some hypothetical future, but, keeping or discusion in the here and now, you acknowledge that books “reign supreme”

“3. The fact that one can distribute Linux and other free software legally and non-infringing is because those companies/persons encourage the FREE sharing and distribution of their software to those who want it.”

However, through the use of the DMCA and other heavy handed laws institutions such as PFF are trying to remove the legality of P2P technology which I use to distribute linux.

“As an author, I DO NOT and HAVE NOT granted permission to anyone to offer my books for free on any server”

And have your works appeared on these “servers”? If so, you can just send a take down notice.

“4. As for solving the problem. Buy the book instead of assuming that there's no harm being done to those of us who are working hard to make a name for ourselves in the writing world.”

I agree with that advice, and find it strang that you would even make such an obvious comment. However, I do not support erosion of my First Amendment rights to make someone's business plan work out.

The following Benjamin Franklin quote would be appropriate here:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

“Let me give you a little insight into the financial world of a writer just starting out in the business. I write full-time and work a day job full-time. I work about 50hrs a week on writing and 40hrs on the day job. I get about 5-6hrs sleep during the week. Not a complaint, simply the facts.”

“My annual take home pay from the day job is $47,000. Last year I made $2,800 off my writing.
I write because it's my love, my passion, but I'm also in it to make a living so that I can eventually quit the day job. I can't do that if people steal my books and distribute them for everyone else in the world to read for free.”

And how is any of this relevant? You have not shown any damages, or that you are affected in the least.

As an Architect, I too have made sacrifices for what I believe is a noble profession. In fact, I have turned down a job offer that was about $15K/year higher, because I had more respect for the work of the other firm.

(Refer again to the Benjamin Franklin quote.)

As another author, I have to respond to enigma's comments to Monica. Specifically, this one:

(M) As an author, I DO NOT and HAVE NOT granted permission to anyone to offer my books for free on any server.

(E) And have your works appeared on these "servers"? If so, you can just send a take down notice.

That's all well and good, but when, exactly, is she supposed to search this server (or any other) to find her work? It's not as if they send you a notice that your books are being uploaded.

I've found my books on other filesharing services, but it hasn't been easy. Many aren't searchable, or are accessible only to members (perhaps because they don't want those pesky authors to know what they're up to?), or aren't listed in alphabetical order. I searched through seventy nine pages of one server to find one of my books -- and still don't know if there were others hidden there in the files.

And say you are lucky enough to find your work on one of these sites. You write up and send a cease and desist, maybe the book is taken down or the account closed, but who's to say it doesn't show up at another site the next day?

I work and write as well. I have a family, and a life. I don't have time to follow these people around the net, asking them not to steal from me.

I've lost royalties because of them. And it angers me to see this being dismissed as not a big deal. For e-book authors especially, this is a direct hit on our writing income.

Arguing that authors who are against the illegal distribution of copyrighted materials are somehow also against the first amendment and liberty is, in my mind, stretching it a bit far.

>

I'm not sure I follow your train of thought here. Are you asking me to show you the exact damages in terms of royalties lost? While they are minimal, they're still a loss. And it really doesn't matter what the amount is. Theft is theft.

Are you willing to let anyone take money from your wallet without any protest? For every dollar an author loses to someone downloading a free eBook, that's one less dollar in that author's pocket. Sure, JK Rowling might not miss the money, but other authors will. This isn't about freedom, it's about economics and the right of honest pay for honest work. Something I believe our forefathers heartily endorsed.

Your posts have led me to believe that you think authors make tons of money, so therefore they're not harmed by free copies of their work offered up on sites such as eSnips. My point in showing you the discrepancy of monies was to make the point that the majority of authors DO NO make a lot of money off their work, and therefore they DO FEEL the pain from the loss of royalties.

As for Benjamin Franklin. The man was definitely a believer in freedom, but I find it doubtful that a man who wanted to abolish taxes would advocate theft, particularly when he viewed England's taxes as the theft of HIS CAPITALISTIC EARNINGS, particularly when he wasn't able to voice his protest to the "organization" stealing his money.

I do keep a watch out for illegal eBook sales, but as Kate D. pointed out, it's very difficult to find an underground movement that shifts so frequently. I can hardly voice my protests if I can't those underground organizations. Of course, anything illegal generally has to go underground doesn't it.

I find your argument that the first amendment somehow gives you the right to access any author's creative work for free illogical.

You indicated

>

This is definitely your right, but I'm not you, and I'm definitely not in this for the nobility of sacrificing myself for the greater good. I'm in it to make a living. America is a capitalistic society, and as such I am a capitalist because I expect payment for my work. I am the one who decides what I'm willing to settle for in terms of payment. I'm definitely not willing to settle on the price of $0.00

Having someone arbitrarily put my books up for download on a site such as eSnips interferes with my freedom to pursue my capitalistic venture. Our forefathers didn't just fight for freedom of speech, they fought for other freedoms as well. They left us a capitalistic legacy along with a number of freedoms.

Clearly, our views are at extreme opposites and polarizing. I doubt there is any middle ground to meet on.

Monica Burns

"As an Architect, I too have made sacrifices for what I believe is a noble profession. In fact, I have turned down a job offer that was about $15K/year higher, because I had more respect for the work of the other firm."

This test should follow the "You indicated" in the previous post.

Monica Burns

"I'm not sure I follow your train of thought here. Are you asking me to show you the exact damages in terms of royalties lost? While they are minimal, they're still a loss. And it really doesn't matter what the amount is. Theft is theft."

Never have I condoned theft--I just don't believe in doing away with the First Amendment, which is basically what the DMCA does.

The DMCA has **nothing** to do with making copyright enforceable. Copyright existed before the DMCA. You actually had a better chance of prosecuting sites such as ESnips BEFORE the DMCA, which established safe harbors for service providers.

The DMCA has however been used to threaten a Scientist who wanted to present a paper, to arrest a programmer who figured out how a piece of software worked, and was cited in Diebold's attempts to supress information about flaws in their voting machines.