On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 06:57:15PM -0800, Philip Hart <philiph at SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: > > > Doctrine of first sale covers this, folks. It's hardly immoral > > > to buy a used book; the author got his cut when it was first > > > sold. > > I don't have an informed opinion on this subject, but my brother's a > > composer, and I don't get music free off the web. I certainly buy > > many of my books used and might well download them free - it's not > > clear to me what's different about that though. > > "Getting music free" is not the same thing as buying a used book. > The appropriate analogy for getting free music would be getting a > free photocopy someone made from a book at one point. > > Downloading a book for free would be in most cases wrong -- > sometimes publishers have set up that sort of thing, and of > course some are out of copyright. I don't see what's better about buying a used book from a store than getting a photocopy from someone. Maybe the point is that part of the value of the book to the original buyer is its resale value. Anyway I'm looking for an argument why I'm not enjoying V.S. Naipul's labor without benefiting him having picked up _A House For Mr. Biswas_ at Phoenix Books in my neighborhood. If I buy a book, scan it, print it out nicely, and give you a copy, or sell it to you for a nominal fee, or at a small profit, is that wrong? If I give you a once-read good as new copy, preventing you from purchasing it? What if I posted _tPotD_ as a pdf file to this list, or the web, as I wish SKZB would do?