Monstrous Regiment

12 views
Skip to first unread message

Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 12:35:57 PM10/19/03
to
Just finished reading it - it won't be available here for a long time
(I can't afford HB, so have to wait for PBs) and I've been suffering.
Then I found it on an ebooks NG this morning.
EXcellent story - and I love the climax-on-climax-on-climax.
Nuff sed.


elfin

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 3:00:01 PM10/19/03
to
Duke of URL had reason to type:

so you read an illegal copy of Monstrous Regiment and posted about it on
here.

care to share which newsgroup so that we can report the offender to Terry's
agent? and to his ISP?

elfin
--
My mind is on a permanent tangent

Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 4:12:02 PM10/19/03
to
"elfin" <el...@elfden.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bmup4t$bvd$1...@library.lspace.org

Believe I've mentioned before that I download a lot of books - that
doesn't interfere with my buying them. In fact, I've started buying
some authors I wasn't aware of until I ran across something by them on
Usenet. In other cases, I was able to discover that I really DIDN'T
like an author and it saved me from wasting money.
I have bought every PTerry book for many years. All this ebook does is
keep me from having to wait a year to get to read it.
Since I read rather quickly (when my vision was better, I'd read /at
least/ one novel a day - now it may take me 2 or possibly 3) and I
spend a *lot* of what little income I have on treeware, there is NO
author ANYwhere who has a legitimate bitch with me.


Orjan Westin

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 5:19:26 PM10/19/03
to
Duke of URL wrote:

> Since I read rather quickly (when my vision was better, I'd read /at
> least/ one novel a day - now it may take me 2 or possibly 3) and I
> spend a *lot* of what little income I have on treeware, there is NO
> author ANYwhere who has a legitimate bitch with me.

That might be so, in view of the two possible meanings of the word
'legitimate' there, but the same might not be said for every other peruser
of these e-books. If nothing else, the originator is in serious breach of
copyright, and if in a nation that has signed the copyright convention
liable in court.

Are you protecting a thief?

Orjan


Darin Johnson

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:12:30 PM10/19/03
to
"Orjan Westin" <nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Are you protecting a thief?

You know, people have always committed crimes. But it seems that it's
only recently that people have been so blatantly obvious about it.
There's not even a faux-naivete. Just idiotic excuses like "I'm poor
and I needed that game", "I couldn't wait", "the publishers are the
real criminals", or "get off my back you righteous twit, everyone else
does it".

--
Darin Johnson
I'm not a well adjusted person, but I play one on the net.

Stacie Hanes

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:23:58 PM10/19/03
to

With you, maybe not. But does everyone use it as a taste-test and then go
buy the bound copy?

Stacie


Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:56:59 PM10/19/03
to
"Orjan Westin" <nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bmuv5d$rbg3q$2...@ID-90122.news.uni-berlin.de

Since I have absolutely no idea who it was posted it, my reply has to
be "no"
BTW: Bringing up "other perusers" is irrelevant - I am not them and am
not responsible for why/how they read books.


Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 9:00:42 PM10/19/03
to
"Stacie Hanes" <house_d...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:i2Fkb.3894$Uz6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net

Have no idea - I'm not "everyone" - I'm responsible only for what I
do.

Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:59:45 PM10/19/03
to
"Darin Johnson" <darin_@_usa_._net> wrote in message
news:cu1k770...@nokia.com

> "Orjan Westin" <nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Are you protecting a thief?
>
> You know, people have always committed crimes. But it seems that
> it's only recently that people have been so blatantly obvious about
> it. There's not even a faux-naivete. Just idiotic excuses like
> "I'm poor and I needed that game", "I couldn't wait", "the
> publishers are the real criminals", or "get off my back you
> righteous twit, everyone else does it".

Perhaps you should pay more attention to what's going on in the book
industry. Since BaenBooks proved that putting free books out on the
internet not only does NOT reduce their sales, it INCREASES them,
other publishers are catching on.
As I said, I've bought every PTerry book since they started. They wear
out from rereading. My ebooks don't.


David Chapman

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 4:18:43 AM10/20/03
to
Duke of URL did not say this. Duke of URL was not here:

> "Stacie Hanes" <house_d...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:i2Fkb.3894$Uz6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net
>> Duke of URL wrote:
>>> All this ebook does
>>> is keep me from having to wait a year to get to read it.
>>
>> But does everyone use it as a taste-test and
>> then go buy the bound copy?
>
> Have no idea - I'm not "everyone" - I'm responsible only for what I
> do.

Newsflash - people don't steal things that they know are of no worth.
Receiving stolen goods encourages theft.

--
I spent six months in the cheese bin!


elfin

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 4:56:54 PM10/19/03
to
Duke of URL had reason to type:

> "elfin" wrote in message

>> Duke of URL had reason to type:

>>> ...[snip] Then I found it on an ebooks NG this morning.


>>> EXcellent story - and I love the climax-on-climax-on-climax.
>>> Nuff sed.
>> so you read an illegal copy of Monstrous Regiment and posted about
>> it on here.
>> care to share which newsgroup so that we can report the offender to
>> Terry's agent? and to his ISP?

> Believe I've mentioned before that I download a lot of books - that
> doesn't interfere with my buying them.

never said it did. But the ebook you downloaded *is* a pirate copy and as
such is illegal. In most countries, sfaiaa though IANAL, downloading a copy
and then reading it would also constitute abreach of copyright.

> In fact, I've started buying
> some authors I wasn't aware of until I ran across something by them on
> Usenet. In other cases, I was able to discover that I really DIDN'T
> like an author and it saved me from wasting money.

Then go to a library, which is legal well in most countries I know of <g>).

> I have bought every PTerry book for many years.

> All this ebook does is
> keep me from having to wait a year to get to read it.

as above. Though it should be noted that others are able to wait for the
paperback. I had to until a few years ago, I never felt the need to go
hunting for an illegal version.

> Since I read rather quickly (when my vision was better, I'd read /at
> least/ one novel a day - now it may take me 2 or possibly 3) and I
> spend a *lot* of what little income I have on treeware, there is NO
> author ANYwhere who has a legitimate bitch with me.

erm, actually there is. All the authors you have read via an illegal ebook.
Even more so for the ones you then decided you didn't like, and therefore
did not buy the book afterwards.

There are only 2 Discworld stories that have been *officially* released for
viewing on the internet. The L-Space Web has both of them, if any more were
made officially available they would undoubtedly have those available as
well.

Daibhid Ceannaideach

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 10:54:51 AM10/20/03
to

And, y'know, Terry gets a lot of publicity from being "Britain's most
shoplifted author", so really, he ought to be grateful for that as well.
--
Dave
Now Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc for FOUR years
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
"The Democrats are now wondering where they can find a liquid metal candidate
for Governer."
-The Now Show, 10/10/02

Daibhid Ceannaideach

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 10:59:26 AM10/20/03
to
>
>From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet

Did you do www.politicalcompass.org? Let me guess, you were quite far on the
lower right.

Orjan Westin

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 11:24:17 AM10/20/03
to
Duke of URL wrote:
>
> BTW: Bringing up "other perusers" is irrelevant - I am not them and am
> not responsible for why/how they read books.

True. So you always buy a paper copy of the book. You never pass a
copyright-infringing file on to someone else or make it available to anybody
else. Is that right? IOW, you're just timeshifting, right? Well,
timeshifting is legal for VCRs and tape recorders, but not for books.
Simple as that. You are breaking the law by perusing an illegal copy of the
book. You do not report the criminals providing you with this illegal
material - are you legally obliged to report a crime where you live?
Morally?

Orjan


Andrew Perry

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 12:30:40 PM10/20/03
to

No, you should be more subtle about it...

So, Duke, where might one download this fine work...? ;-)

Sanity

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 1:31:09 PM10/20/03
to
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 21:56:54 +0100, "elfin" <el...@elfden.co.uk> wrote in
article <bn095f$g21$2...@library.lspace.org>:

> But the ebook you downloaded *is* a pirate copy and as
> such is illegal. In most countries, sfaiaa though IANAL, downloading a copy
> and then reading it would also constitute abreach of copyright.

In the Netherlands, it's a breach of copyright to make the protected
material available. However, the downloading of such material is legally
allowed through the "allowance to make personal copies" clause. Which is
why the term "illegal download" is completely wrong in .nl, because no
such thing exists under our laws.

TTFN,
Michel AKA Sanity

--
"Sanity shall make ye -ing fret": | "A cat has 40 million hairs: 5
www.affordable-prawns.co.uk | million on its back, 10 million on
www.affordable-hedgehogs.co.uk | its belly, and 25 million on your
Check the AFPChess Tournament! | couch." --Midas Dekkers

Sanity

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 1:35:34 PM10/20/03
to
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:59:45 -0500, "Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet>
wrote in article <vp6cs26...@corp.supernews.com>:

> Perhaps you should pay more attention to what's going on in the book
> industry. Since BaenBooks proved that putting free books out on the
> internet not only does NOT reduce their sales, it INCREASES them,
> other publishers are catching on.

That is, however, a choice of the publisher and/or the holder of the
copyright. In this case, Terry has now allowed it, so it is illegal to
publish it. If Terry thinks it's worthwile to publish books free of
charge, he might allow so under his terms. So it doesn't matter what some
research has proven, because other research can easily prove the opposite.
(not that I don't believe BaenBooks). It's just not very polite, to say
the least, to do so without the author's permission.

Orjan Westin

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 1:46:59 PM10/20/03
to
Sanity wrote:
>
> In the Netherlands, it's a breach of copyright to make the protected
> material available. However, the downloading of such material is
> legally allowed through the "allowance to make personal copies"
> clause.

Are you really allowed to make a personal copy of 100% of the material?
It's usually capped at 10% or 10 pages, whichever is less.

Orjan


Beth Winter

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 3:12:11 PM10/20/03
to

No, that's for quoting or providing a sample as an enticement for people
to buy the whole thing. Personal copies you can make as you want - the
same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a tape player in
the car.

--
Beth Winter
The Discworld Compendium <http://www.extenuation.net/disc/>
"To absent friends, lost loves, old gods and the season of mists."
-- Neil Gaiman

elfin

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 3:29:54 PM10/20/03
to
Sanity had reason to type:

> "elfin" wrote

>> But the ebook you downloaded *is* a pirate copy and as


>> such is illegal. In most countries, sfaiaa though IANAL, downloading
>> a copy and then reading it would also constitute abreach of
>> copyright.
>
> In the Netherlands, it's a breach of copyright to make the protected
> material available. However, the downloading of such material is
> legally allowed through the "allowance to make personal copies"
> clause. Which is why the term "illegal download" is completely wrong
> in .nl, because no such thing exists under our laws.

Surely the 'allowance to make persobal copies' only applies if you actually
own the book? Though perhaps it could be handled under the 'receiving stolen
goods' clause? (or is that UK specific?)

Darin Johnson

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 3:44:34 PM10/20/03
to
"elfin" <el...@elfden.co.uk> writes:

> > All this ebook does is
> > keep me from having to wait a year to get to read it.
>
> as above. Though it should be noted that others are able to wait for the
> paperback. I had to until a few years ago, I never felt the need to go
> hunting for an illegal version.

It's called "instant gratification". It's all about "me", without
passing concern about "them".

Also the attitude of "I'll pay for it later, so it does no harm" is
a myth. It does harm because it supports the site that collects these
illegal books. This isn't a site where you pay for the ebook and
they'll mail you the real book a year later, instead it's undoubtedly
a site where a large percentage of visitors never buy the real book.

In other cases of piracy, there is a view of "my one single crime is
not that big a deal", which is also a myth. One crime doesn't hurt
society much, but if there are thousands or millions of them...

--
Darin Johnson
"Particle Man, Particle Man, doing the things a particle can"

David Chapman

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 4:41:35 PM10/20/03
to
Beth Winter did not say this. Beth Winter was not here:

> Personal copies you can make as you
> want - the same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a
> tape player in the car.

Except, of course, that the Rapacious Idiot Assholes of America have had
this made illegal.

Beth Winter

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 4:45:53 PM10/20/03
to
David Chapman wrote:
>
> Beth Winter did not say this. Beth Winter was not here:
> > Personal copies you can make as you
> > want - the same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a
> > tape player in the car.
>
> Except, of course, that the Rapacious Idiot Assholes of America have had
> this made illegal.

Only in America. However much they might wish it, they do not set
international law.

Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:14:38 PM10/20/03
to
"Daibhid Ceannaideach" <daibhidc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031020105926...@mb-m07.aol.com

>> From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet
>> Date: 20/10/03 01:56 GMT Daylight Time
>> Message-id: <vp6cmrc...@corp.supernews.com>
>> "Orjan Westin" <nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:bmuv5d$rbg3q$2...@ID-90122.news.uni-berlin.de
>>> Duke of URL wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since I read rather quickly (when my vision was better, I'd read
>>>> /at least/ one novel a day - now it may take me 2 or possibly 3)
>>>> and I spend a *lot* of what little income I have on treeware,
>>>> there is NO author ANYwhere who has a legitimate bitch with me.
>>>
>>> That might be so, in view of the two possible meanings of the word
>>> 'legitimate' there, but the same might not be said for every other
>>> peruser of these e-books. If nothing else, the originator is in
>>> serious breach of copyright, and if in a nation that has signed
>>> the copyright convention liable in court.
>>>
>>> Are you protecting a thief?
>>
>> Since I have absolutely no idea who it was posted it, my reply has
>> to be "no"
>> BTW: Bringing up "other perusers" is irrelevant - I am not them
>> and am not responsible for why/how they read books.
>
> Did you do www.politicalcompass.org? Let me guess, you were quite
> far on the lower right.

Nope - never heard of it.


elfin

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:14:22 PM10/20/03
to
David Chapman had reason to type:

> Beth Winter did not say this. Beth Winter was not here:
>> Personal copies you can make as you
>> want - the same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a
>> tape player in the car.
>
> Except, of course, that the Rapacious Idiot Assholes of America have
> had this made illegal.

I know I've posted this before, and I think the law has now changed..

It used to be illegal to record onto VHS from TV broadcasts in the UK.

elfin

CCA

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:23:02 PM10/20/03
to
Duke of URL wrote

>"elfin" wrote

>> Duke of URL had reason to type:

>>> Just finished reading it - it won't be available here for a long
>>> time (I can't afford HB, so have to wait for PBs) and I've been
>>> suffering. Then I found it on an ebooks NG this morning.

>> so you read an illegal copy of Monstrous Regiment and posted about


>> it on here.
>> care to share which newsgroup so that we can report the offender to
>> Terry's agent? and to his ISP?

>Believe I've mentioned before that I download a lot of books - that
>doesn't interfere with my buying them. In fact, I've started buying
>some authors I wasn't aware of until I ran across something by them on
>Usenet.

As I understand it, it wasn't the fact that you were reading them but the fact
that they exist at all that bothers people. (Although I'm typing this before
reading rest of thread -- we'll see)
E-books -- they must be stopped, and now!
CCA:)

--
Family Bites Website and sample chapter at http://www.falboroughhall.co.uk

Orjan Westin

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 4:08:57 PM10/20/03
to
Beth Winter wrote:
> Orjan Westin wrote:
>>
>> Sanity wrote:
>>>
>>> In the Netherlands, it's a breach of copyright to make the protected
>>> material available. However, the downloading of such material is
>>> legally allowed through the "allowance to make personal copies"
>>> clause.
>>
>> Are you really allowed to make a personal copy of 100% of the
>> material? It's usually capped at 10% or 10 pages, whichever is less.
>
> No, that's for quoting or providing a sample as an enticement for
> people to buy the whole thing. Personal copies you can make as you
> want - the same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a
> tape player in the car.

Well, right, but only after you've bought it on CD. You're still not allowed
to tape your friends' CDs for your own use. It's not personal any more then,
IYSWIM.

Orjan


Beth Winter

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:33:59 PM10/20/03
to

According to which law? In which country? IIRC, TRIPPS doesn't include
this regulation.

Stig M. Valstad

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:41:47 PM10/20/03
to
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:18:43 +0100, David Chapman wrote:
>
>Newsflash - people don't steal things that they know are of no worth.
>Receiving stolen goods encourages theft.

Even if the thief never know the goods is received and don't
get paid?

Which makes me wonder, why do people do it? Converting a
paper book into an e-book is lots of work. I can't see much
of a market - who would pay for these e-books when they are
freely shared on news-groups, p2p networks, etc., and the
legal copies of the book doesn't cost that much and are
easy to find?

--
Stig M. Valstad

-This is sick!! Think about what you're doing!!
-I have. Unsettling, isn't it? -- JtHM

Jonathan Ellis

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:52:59 PM10/20/03
to

"Stig M. Valstad" <sti...@siclone.itea.ntnu.no> wrote in message
news:slrnbp8lid....@siclone.itea.ntnu.no...

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:18:43 +0100, David Chapman wrote:
> >
> >Newsflash - people don't steal things that they know are of no
worth.
> >Receiving stolen goods encourages theft.
>
> Even if the thief never know the goods is received and don't
> get paid?
>
> Which makes me wonder, why do people do it? Converting a
> paper book into an e-book is lots of work. I can't see much
> of a market - who would pay for these e-books when they are
> freely shared on news-groups, p2p networks, etc., and the
> legal copies of the book doesn't cost that much and are
> easy to find?

I suspect, generally, that somebody converts it into a *paying* (as in
pay to view or pay to download) e-book, and then somebody else pirates
THAT and puts it up for free. By getting a free pirate version, you're
not just robbing the author: you're most likely also robbing the
person who actually did the hard work of turning it *into* electronic
format legitimately, probably having paid handsomely for the privilege
and expecting to make some money back from it on a pay-to-view or
pay-to-download basis...

Jonathan.


kilyth

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 5:58:41 PM10/20/03
to
Andrew Perry <to...@andrew-perry.com> wrote in message news:<3F940DAD...@andrew-perry.com>...

Just think how much hassle could have been spared with the words,
"bought on Amazon" or "borrowed from a friend"

Kilyth
(doesnt' condone this behaviour!)

Peter Ellis

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 6:50:20 PM10/20/03
to
jona...@franz-liszt.freeserve.co.uk wrote:
>
>I suspect, generally, that somebody converts it into a *paying* (as in
>pay to view or pay to download) e-book, and then somebody else pirates
>THAT and puts it up for free. By getting a free pirate version, you're
>not just robbing the author: you're most likely also robbing the
>person who actually did the hard work of turning it *into* electronic
>format legitimately

No such thing in the case of Terry's books, I can tell you that
straight off.

Peter

Jonathan Ellis

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 7:23:30 PM10/20/03
to

"Peter Ellis" <pj...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19fe77041...@news.cis.dfn.de...

Yup, I know that too. Which goes back to the original question of,
what does the person (not Pterry) who actually sits down and types the
book onto computer, actually *get* out of it, apart from a kick at the
thought of (a) cheating the system, and (b) other people doing so
thanks to him?

Jonathan.


Mark C Barltrop

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 2:22:45 AM10/21/03
to
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 00:23:30 +0100, "Jonathan Ellis"
<jona...@franz-liszt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>Yup, I know that too. Which goes back to the original question of,
>what does the person (not Pterry) who actually sits down and types the
>book onto computer, actually *get* out of it, apart from a kick at the
>thought of (a) cheating the system, and (b) other people doing so
>thanks to him?

a lot of people like ebooks- they're convenient, they're ecological (&
jungle) friendly - its a shame that in the Discworld's case they also
happen to be illegal.
--
Mark C Barltrop <ne...@tachyonuk.com>

David Chapman

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 6:54:06 PM10/20/03
to
Stig M. Valstad did not say this. Stig M. Valstad was not here:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:18:43 +0100, David Chapman wrote:
>>
>> Newsflash - people don't steal things that they know are of no worth.
>> Receiving stolen goods encourages theft.
>
> Even if the thief never know the goods is received and don't
> get paid?
>
> Which makes me wonder, why do people do it?

Because they want to smash the system, because they think it's really unfair
that they can't have everything they want given to them, because they think
wrecking people's livelihoods r0x0rs. Mostly, though, it's because they
can.

paul cooke

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:21:09 AM10/21/03
to
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:

> www.politicalcompass.org

kin hell... there's some right devious questions on that site...

--
Has your ms-windows computer been turned into a SPAM server???
<http://www.computerweekly.com/Article123378.htm>


Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 9:18:29 AM10/21/03
to
"paul cooke" <paul_cooke@linux_NO_SPAM_mail.org> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.10.21....@bigbox.madhouse

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>
>> www.politicalcompass.org
>
> kin hell... there's some right devious questions on that site...

I don't recall who wanted to know where I fall on their interpretation
of my opinions.
Just took the "test" - came out (from Center) Authoritarian 3, Right
2.
I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some of the
questions make unjustifiable assumptions. They also don't make
provision for not caring at all about an issue.
I take a lot of surveys (I'm a registered test-sample) and it took me
quite a while to get a couple of the survey companies to change
certain questions, For example, they would ask if something had
increased or decreased my television viewing. I finally got them to
put a preparatory loop in that would ask *if* I watched tv (I don't)
instead of assuming that *everyone HAS to*.
This survey reminds me of a VERY similar one we created years back to
interrogate RPG Players - they had to answer the questions in their
Character's persona - the results were used to define possible careers
for the Characters. I wonder if the people who put this one together
ever used that?


Daibhid Ceannaideach

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 9:41:59 AM10/21/03
to
>From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet
>Date: 21/10/03 14:18 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <vpach7g...@corp.supernews.com>

>
>"paul cooke" <paul_cooke@linux_NO_SPAM_mail.org> wrote in message
>news:pan.2003.10.21....@bigbox.madhouse
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>>
< www.politicalcompass.org>

>


>I don't recall who wanted to know where I fall on their interpretation
>of my opinions.

Um, me I think. Can't recall why, now.

>Just took the "test" - came out (from Center) Authoritarian 3, Right
>2.
>
>I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some of the
>questions make unjustifiable assumptions. They also don't make
>provision for not caring at all about an issue.

Yeah, that bothered me as well.

Richard Bos

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 9:29:08 AM10/21/03
to
sti...@siclone.itea.ntnu.no (Stig M. Valstad) wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:18:43 +0100, David Chapman wrote:
>
> >Newsflash - people don't steal things that they know are of no worth.
> >Receiving stolen goods encourages theft.
>
> Even if the thief never know the goods is received and don't
> get paid?
>
> Which makes me wonder, why do people do it?

For the same reason that people demolish phone booths, I guess.

Richard

Richard Bos

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 9:59:00 AM10/21/03
to
"elfin" <el...@elfden.co.uk> wrote:

> Sanity had reason to type:
>

> > In the Netherlands, it's a breach of copyright to make the protected
> > material available. However, the downloading of such material is
> > legally allowed through the "allowance to make personal copies"
> > clause. Which is why the term "illegal download" is completely wrong
> > in .nl, because no such thing exists under our laws.
>
> Surely the 'allowance to make persobal copies' only applies if you actually
> own the book?

Yes, it does. It would probably be legal to download an e-copy of a book
you own in paper form - it would certainly be legal to scan in and
character-recognise the book. Of course, sharing that copy would be
illegal - it's allowed for personal use only.

Richard

CCA

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 11:36:24 AM10/21/03
to
Mark C Barltrop wrote

>a lot of people like ebooks

Not authors, I think you'll find.
Grrrr...[1]

> they're convenient, they're ecological (&
>jungle) friendly - its a shame that in the Discworld's case they also
>happen to be illegal.

I don't think it's a shame at all. I think it's very understandable.
CCA:)
[1] On behalf of the authors whose work people actually want to make into
e-books, that is.

Gideon Hallett

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 11:41:26 AM10/21/03
to
daibhidc...@aol.com (Daibhid Ceannaideach) wrote in
news:20031021094159...@mb-m25.aol.com:

>>From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet
>>Date: 21/10/03 14:18 GMT Daylight Time
>>Message-id: <vpach7g...@corp.supernews.com>
>>
>>"paul cooke" <paul_cooke@linux_NO_SPAM_mail.org> wrote in
>>message news:pan.2003.10.21....@bigbox.madhouse
>>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>>>
> < www.politicalcompass.org>
>

<snip>


>>
>>I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some
>>of the questions make unjustifiable assumptions. They also
>>don't make provision for not caring at all about an issue.
>
> Yeah, that bothered me as well.

That's probably applicable to a third axis - varying between utter
devotion and complete indifference.

Gideon.

(who already knew that he belonged deep in the lower left quadrant)

--
(((( | ====diog...@freeuk.com.=========================|
o__))))) | - Bringing permed '70s-retro hedgehogs to the =|
__ \'((((( | common people since he got bored one afternoon. =|

Eric Jarvis

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 11:49:31 AM10/21/03
to
paul cooke wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>
> > www.politicalcompass.org
>
> kin hell... there's some right devious questions on that site...
>

it was put together by a couple of VERY clever people

--
eric - afprelationships in headers
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

Sanity

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 10:44:31 AM10/21/03
to
In a galaxy far away from home, I saw this article by Orjan Westin (nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk):

AFAIK (but it was mainly aimed at MP3), copying for personal use is
quite broad. For instance, I'm allowed to borrow a CD from the library
and copy it for myself. There is no obligation whatsoever to own the
thing I'm copying. But suppose I make a personal copy of a friend's CD,
then I'd be allowed to do so, but the friend might be breaching
copyright for offering the material without the copyrightholder's
permission.

Just like when I'm downloading MP3's through Kazaa, it's legally
allowed, but the person offering any copyrighted material is not allowed
to do so.

TTFN,
Michel AKA Sanity

--
"Sanity shall make ye -ing fret": | "A cat has 40 million hairs: 5
www.affordable-prawns.co.uk | million on its back, 10 million on
www.affordable-hedgehogs.co.uk | its belly, and 25 million on your
Check the AFPChess Tournament! | couch." --Midas Dekkers

Sanity

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 11:50:39 AM10/21/03
to
In a galaxy far away from home, I saw this article by David Chapman (jedit_...@hotmail.com):

> Beth Winter did not say this. Beth Winter was not here:
> > Personal copies you can make as you
> > want - the same way you can copy a CD onto tape if you've only got a
> > tape player in the car.
>
> Except, of course, that the Rapacious Idiot Assholes of America have had
> this made illegal.

Except, of course, that their laws are still not our laws. Which is
nice.

Daibhid Ceannaideach

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 12:43:03 PM10/21/03
to
>
>From: Gideon Hallett diog...@freeuk.com
>Date: 21/10/03 16:41 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <Xns941BA9C971...@195.200.1.58>
>
>daibhidc...@aol.com (Daibhid Ceannaideach) wrote in
>news:20031021094159...@mb-m25.aol.com:
>
>>>From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet
>>>Date: 21/10/03 14:18 GMT Daylight Time
>>>Message-id: <vpach7g...@corp.supernews.com>
>>>
>>>"paul cooke" <paul_cooke@linux_NO_SPAM_mail.org> wrote in
>>>message news:pan.2003.10.21....@bigbox.madhouse
>>>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>>>>
>> < www.politicalcompass.org>
>>
><snip>
>>>
>>>I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some
>>>of the questions make unjustifiable assumptions. They also
>>>don't make provision for not caring at all about an issue.
>>
>> Yeah, that bothered me as well.
>
>That's probably applicable to a third axis - varying between utter
>devotion and complete indifference.

I dunno. I mean, when the options are "strongly disagree, agree, disagree,
strongly disagree", it seems to me that the absence of a "don't know" in the
middle tends to skew the results somewhat.

> Gideon.
>
>(who already knew that he belonged deep in the lower left quadrant)

Whereas I knew I was in the lower left, but surprised at how deeply I ended up.
ISTR our Torak ended up left of centre as well, which was... surprising.
(Although he was quite far along the Authoritarian side, which wasn't).

Dom

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 1:08:47 PM10/21/03
to
Duke of URL wrote:

>I take a lot of surveys (I'm a registered test-sample) and it took me
>quite a while to get a couple of the survey companies to change
>certain questions, For example, they would ask if something had
>increased or decreased my television viewing. I finally got them to
>put a preparatory loop in that would ask *if* I watched tv (I don't)
>instead of assuming that *everyone HAS to*.

I took part in a telephone survey recently. One section asked "Which
of the folowing radio stations do you listen to?, you must answer
only Yes, or No, to each question."

I had to go through about 20 of these, covering all of the south-east
of .uk

They wouldn't let me say "I don't listen to the radio (unless there's
a Pterry interview on)".

Other parts were equally lame.

The survey was about petrol/diesel brands.

It started with "Where do you buy your petrol (in order of
preference)?"

Reply: "Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys".

Later question: "Do you buy your petrol from Shell?"
Reply: "<unprintable>"

The call (cold call) wasted about 30 minutes of my time on a Sunday
afternoon (grrr).

(apologies for the rant)
--
Dom
afpSlave to CCA

Mark C Barltrop

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 1:16:58 PM10/21/03
to
On 21 Oct 2003 15:36:24 GMT, sphi...@aol.com (CCA) wrote:

On 21 Oct 2003 15:36:24 GMT, in alt.fan.pratchett you wrote:

>Mark C Barltrop wrote
>
>>a lot of people like ebooks
>
>Not authors, I think you'll find.
>Grrrr...[1]

goto www.baen,com - a lot of their authors are active in their fora
-ask them what they think of ebooks


>
>> they're convenient, they're ecological (&
>>jungle) friendly - its a shame that in the Discworld's case they also
>>happen to be illegal.
>
>I don't think it's a shame at all. I think it's very understandable.
>CCA:)
>[1] On behalf of the authors whose work people actually want to make into
>e-books, that is.

Why? what does it matter to you or Pterry if I pop into Asda & pick
up your latest novel or download it from Fictionwise? You'd still get
paid just the same.

Darin Johnson

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 1:48:07 PM10/21/03
to
"Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> writes:

> I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some of the
> questions make unjustifiable assumptions.

I see big flaws with it. They explicitly don't have "neutral"
answers, and give a reason for it, but on many of the questions I
really felt uncomfortable agreeing or disagreeing (though you can
just not answer).

Some questions are very vague. Ie, "Are rich people taxed too much".
Well, I don't know - which country are we talking about, and which
particular tax? Or the one about mothers can have careers but their
primary duty should be as homemakers - what if I feel that this should
apply to fathers as well? In essence, the questions betray bias on
the part of the askers.

The 2 dimensional political graph is just way too similar to the US
Libertarian pamphlets that it makes me wonder. It's also 2
dimensional, which is better than 1 dimensional of course, but still
pretty flat and undescriptive. You also have to wonder how exactly
they define what the center is.

--
Darin Johnson
Luxury! In MY day, we had to make do with 5 bytes of swap...

Gid Holyoake

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 2:03:53 PM10/21/03
to
In article <3f950580....@news.nl.net>, Richard Bos generously
decided to share with us..

Snippetry..

> Yes, it does. It would probably be legal to download an e-copy of a book
> you own in paper form - it would certainly be legal to scan in and
> character-recognise the book.

Not without permission it wouldn't.. checks the normal copyright notice
in a book and quotes:

"No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced
into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means
(electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without
the prior written permission of the publisher."

Hmmm.. am I in breach of copyright by reproducing that copyright notice..
probably.. so I won't tell you which book I got it from! :-)

Gid

Darin Johnson

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 1:52:44 PM10/21/03
to
daibhidc...@aol.com (Daibhid Ceannaideach) writes:

> I dunno. I mean, when the options are "strongly disagree, agree, disagree,
> strongly disagree", it seems to me that the absence of a "don't know" in the
> middle tends to skew the results somewhat.

It's not the "don't know" that bothers me. The site explicitly says
in its FAQ that they want the people to actually think about the
issues, which makes sense. But there's no provision allowed for "I've
thought long and hard about it, but I can neither agree nor disagree
with the vague statement".

> Whereas I knew I was in the lower left, but surprised at how deeply
> I ended up.

I'm slightly lower left, roughly near Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.
Which surprised me, since I always considered myself moderate.
But there were 6 category of questions distilled into 2 dimensions,
so what can you expect.

--
Darin Johnson
Gravity is a harsh mistress -- The Tick

paul cooke

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 2:38:26 PM10/21/03
to

You didn't put them on hold while you went to fetch the "decision maker"
in the household???

Eric Jarvis

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:07:59 PM10/21/03
to
Darin Johnson wrote:
> "Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> writes:
>
> > I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some of the
> > questions make unjustifiable assumptions.
>
> I see big flaws with it. They explicitly don't have "neutral"
> answers, and give a reason for it, but on many of the questions I
> really felt uncomfortable agreeing or disagreeing (though you can
> just not answer).
>
> Some questions are very vague. Ie, "Are rich people taxed too much".
> Well, I don't know - which country are we talking about, and which
> particular tax? Or the one about mothers can have careers but their
> primary duty should be as homemakers - what if I feel that this should
> apply to fathers as well? In essence, the questions betray bias on
> the part of the askers.
>

it isn't looking for precise and complete answers...all it needs is some
instant data points to place you on the graph...many of the questions are
there to relate a particular answer to a specific direction on the graph,
all other answers simply don't affect where you are placed

> The 2 dimensional political graph is just way too similar to the US
> Libertarian pamphlets that it makes me wonder. It's also 2
> dimensional, which is better than 1 dimensional of course, but still
> pretty flat and undescriptive. You also have to wonder how exactly
> they define what the center is.
>

as has been discussed before, they see two dimensions as being far from
complete...but far easier to represent on a web page than three or
four...it's only intended to break down the idea of a single right-left
axis

they don't define a centre...they define the extreme ends of the
spectrum...the centre is wherever that places it...which is not what most
people expect, since most people expect the centre to be a consensus,
which it isn't...on many issues the consensus is quite close to one of the
extremes

--
eric - afprelationships in headers
www.ericjarvis.co.uk

all these years I've waited for the revolution
and all we end up getting is spin

Eric Jarvis

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:14:00 PM10/21/03
to
Darin Johnson wrote:
> daibhidc...@aol.com (Daibhid Ceannaideach) writes:
>
> > I dunno. I mean, when the options are "strongly disagree, agree, disagree,
> > strongly disagree", it seems to me that the absence of a "don't know" in the
> > middle tends to skew the results somewhat.
>
> It's not the "don't know" that bothers me. The site explicitly says
> in its FAQ that they want the people to actually think about the
> issues, which makes sense. But there's no provision allowed for "I've
> thought long and hard about it, but I can neither agree nor disagree
> with the vague statement".
>

you can not answer at all

> > Whereas I knew I was in the lower left, but surprised at how deeply
> > I ended up.
>
> I'm slightly lower left, roughly near Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.
> Which surprised me, since I always considered myself moderate.
> But there were 6 category of questions distilled into 2 dimensions,
> so what can you expect.
>

Ghandi and Mandela ARE moderate on economic issues and only a smidgeon
away from moderate when it comes to libertarian/authoritarian...it seems
an admirably moderate place to be...right in the middle of the graph is
not necessarily moderate since the graph is defined by the extremes not by
a consensus at the centre

Mark C Barltrop

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:34:39 PM10/21/03
to

Actually "Fair Use" would allow you to reproduce that much and more.
Those legal notices are of no effect when overridden by Law.

Duke of URL

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:37:35 PM10/21/03
to
"Daibhid Ceannaideach" <daibhidc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031021124303...@mb-m28.aol.com

>> From: Gideon Hallett diog...@freeuk.com
>> Date: 21/10/03 16:41 GMT Daylight Time
>> Message-id: <Xns941BA9C971...@195.200.1.58>
>> daibhidc...@aol.com (Daibhid Ceannaideach) wrote in
>> news:20031021094159...@mb-m25.aol.com:
>>>> From: "Duke of URL" macbenahATkdsiDOTnet
>>>> Date: 21/10/03 14:18 GMT Daylight Time
>>>> Message-id: <vpach7g...@corp.supernews.com>
>>>> "paul cooke" <paul_cooke@linux_NO_SPAM_mail.org> wrote in
>>>> message news:pan.2003.10.21....@bigbox.madhouse
>>>>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:38 -0500, Duke of URL wrote:
>>>>>
>>> < www.politicalcompass.org>
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> I was slightly impressed by it. I see some flaws, though. Some
>>>> of the questions make unjustifiable assumptions. They also
>>>> don't make provision for not caring at all about an issue.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that bothered me as well.
>>
>> That's probably applicable to a third axis - varying between utter
>> devotion and complete indifference.
>
> I dunno. I mean, when the options are "strongly disagree, agree,
> disagree, strongly disagree", it seems to me that the absence of a
> "don't know" in the middle tends to skew the results somewhat.

No, the middle should be "Don't Care".
Adding in "Don't Know" would be the Z-axis: Knowledge About Topic,
ranging from "Never Heard of It" to "Have Studied It Deeply"


Sanity

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:09:25 PM10/21/03
to
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 19:03:53 +0100, Gid Holyoake <ab...@brynamman.org.uk>
wrote in article <MPG.19ff80e16...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>:

> In article <3f950580....@news.nl.net>, Richard Bos generously
> decided to share with us..
>
> Snippetry..
>
>> Yes, it does. It would probably be legal to download an e-copy of a book
>> you own in paper form - it would certainly be legal to scan in and
>> character-recognise the book.
>
> Not without permission it wouldn't.. checks the normal copyright notice
> in a book and quotes:
>
> "No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced
> into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means
> (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without
> the prior written permission of the publisher."

Hmmm. Either the personal copy doesn't go for books, or it doesn't matter
what is says in the copyright notice because the law goes above that. ISTR
that on CD's it sometimes says that 'unauthorized copying is not
permitted', which is a good notice, because a personal copy is authorized
anyway.

> Hmmm.. am I in breach of copyright by reproducing that copyright notice..
> probably.. so I won't tell you which book I got it from! :-)

From a dutch comedian, about learning maths:
"Sorry, I can't do this multiplying excercise"
"Why not?"
"No part of this publication may be multiplied without permission of the
publisher".
:-)

CCA

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:10:23 PM10/21/03
to
Mark C Barltrop wrote

> what does it matter to you or Pterry if I pop into Asda & pick
>up your latest novel or download it from Fictionwise? You'd still get
>paid just the same.

Pop into Asda and pick up my latest novel. Er...just a moment...

<Laughter>

Maybe in a few years time -- for now it's Amazon or waiting several weeks for
Water-bloody-stones to get off their collective arse and actually process your
order...
Okay, this is becoming one of those 'open the floodgates' rants...
But do authors get paid if you download one of their books? I didn't think
they did.
CCA:)

Graycat

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:10:40 PM10/21/03
to
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:37:35 -0500, "Duke of URL"
<macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote:

>"Daibhid Ceannaideach" <daibhidc...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20031021124303...@mb-m28.aol.com

>> I dunno. I mean, when the options are "strongly disagree, agree,


>> disagree, strongly disagree", it seems to me that the absence of a
>> "don't know" in the middle tends to skew the results somewhat.
>
>No, the middle should be "Don't Care".
>Adding in "Don't Know" would be the Z-axis: Knowledge About Topic,
>ranging from "Never Heard of It" to "Have Studied It Deeply"

How about "that depends" which is what I found myself running into
every other question or so... :o)


--
Elin
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://www.student.lu.se/~his02ero/index.html

From adress valid, but rarely checked. Use Reply-To to contact me

Graycat

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:11:38 PM10/21/03
to
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:52:44 GMT, Darin Johnson <darin_@_usa_._net>
wrote:


>I'm slightly lower left, roughly near Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.
>Which surprised me, since I always considered myself moderate.
>But there were 6 category of questions distilled into 2 dimensions,
>so what can you expect.

Ah, you're with me then. We can start a party :o) I was pretty near on
top of Dalai Lama.

Orjan Westin

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:17:57 PM10/21/03
to
Graycat wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:37:35 -0500, "Duke of URL"
> <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote:
>
>> Adding in "Don't Know" would be the Z-axis: Knowledge About Topic,
>> ranging from "Never Heard of It" to "Have Studied It Deeply"
>
> How about "that depends" which is what I found myself running into
> every other question or so... :o)

Let me guess: you're Swedish, aren't you?

;-)

Orjan


CCA

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:28:25 PM10/21/03
to
Dom wrote

[Telephone survey]

>The call (cold call) wasted about 30 minutes of my time on a Sunday
>afternoon (grrr).

I think you need to tell these people you're not interested as soon as you know
it's a survey. Otherwise they'll keep you chatting for ages.
CCA:)
AfpMistress to Dom