NO.
This is common in the psychedelic community. I do not know why you would suggest otherwise.
Does anyone remember the time Otts house burned down? People donated. Shulgin got sick? People donated. There are propably tons of other examples so i woulld like to ask you to stop insulting the psychedelic community.

I'm fed up with static rules. There is only one and that is love, support, respect for all (living) things in the Universe.

Ummmmmmmmm......

How is your borrowing it any different from my downloading, reading and deleting it?

The author makes $0 off of your borrowing...the author makes $0 off of my downloading. I delete the file when I'm done...you return the book. I get the knowledge...you get the knowledge...the author makes $0.

So how exactly are our ethics different in regards to this?

you already know,
the copy I borrow is paid for, the author does not lose money on it, because it was not a freely made copy

Every book printed costs money, every book sold makes money

to copy it without paying for it is not like borrowing a paid for copy

with lending there is only one copy lent at a time,
to duplicate it is totally different than borrowing it,

if you think about numbers this is obvious, a single paid for copy cannot be distributed to thousands of people at once, the difference of ethics are clear to many people

this is why the laws about this are called 'fair use laws'


It does not seem to be that common, and i know people who donated and held fundraisers for those causes. I think not being honest about things insults the psychedelic community, which is not any better or more or less ethical than any community, it is a community of humans and is diverse. It is not a community of enlightened loving people, nor is it a community lacking enlightened loving people. I've seen a lot of it both online and off and can't say that it isn't a very human community.

i have seen people help eachother when asked in many communities
what really would be special is if the community looked out for eachother without having to be asked, there are some of them who do that, but there are also those who don't.

the average member of this community tends to be rather young, under 30, the older members are often more loving, caring and mature, but there is an attitude among the young that the world owes them, like the idea that the world owes them information, or what they cannot afford.
the word that comes to mind is envy

So let me get this straight...my copy appeared out of thin air? No one bought the initial book from which the electronic copies were made?

Come on now...the only difference is the number of borrowers...both your borrowed hardcopy and my borrowed electronic copy originated after someone else paid for the text.

it is ok to buy a single book and then put it online and let everyone enjoy from that copy?

and you think that is the same as a friend lending a hard copy out?

you really are trying to pass those off as equivalent?

That buying a single copy and using it to give the book away is the same as a local library buying a copy and lending it out to one person at a time?

You are arguing two different things it seems.. Are you arguing the ethics of the friend who lends it to you / the person who makes a copy and uploads the book, or are you arguing the ethics of the person that reads it, from whichever source?

Information needs to be free. Period.

The authors need to be compensated for their work but if they make it nearly impossible for the average joe to get a copy, then profits obviously aren't a big motivation for the author.

In this day and age, piracy is only going to continue to get worse. I've been a pirate for many many years and that isn't going to change any time soon.

If this was such a big deal to the authors, it seems that they would make some sort of an official statement of concern.

From what I can tell, none of the authors are too worried about it.

If I took the time to write a book, I would prefer that it gets spread far and wide by whatever means necessary.

These books are about sharing information with people who wish to absorb that information.

ok, what if piracy ends up harming the ability of an author to do research and publish?
won't that end up harming the cause of the spread of information?

the problem is that piracy like so many of our behaviors is not a sustainable practice
it bites the hand that feeds it

As for ethics, (endlessness)
I am addressing the ethics of someone who feels that if they cannot afford something then they will obtain it by taking it without paying for it, verses the ethics of someone who if they cannot afford something will not take it

this is in terms of something that is not vital to existence,

I have been given books by authors, clearly they made no money on doing so, but it was also their choice. I think that the author needs to be respected.

If this discussion was taking place 20 years ago, I'd agree whole heartedly but in the times we are living in today, I feel this is irrelevant.

With sites like Kickstarter and the ability to accept donations, all the author has to do is get the word out that he's working on a new project and needs support. Based on what I've seen so far, this sort of campaign works really well.

Just look at the book that Dennis McKenna is working on. Funded completely through Kickstarter.

People are learning to work smarter and cooperatively. I still stand firm to the belief that if piracy was such a big deal to the authors, they would make a statement about it.

Have you heard of any authors complaining about piracy? I haven't.

Yes.

I dont know, it seems to me we're going round and round and that the points you conceded to earlier (like entropymancer's extended post, also what I said in an earlier post about the problem being 'not supporting', whichever way that is), and you're going back to talking in absolutes, about how piracy is bad, people that pirate are unethical, without any recognition of contextual factors, and going back to a stereotypical view of what piracy is.. Im not sure much is being gained in a discussion if previously acknowledged arguments are ignored/forgotten.

you are right endlessness,

i was talking about what Snozz has been saying
he said that if he cannot afford a book he would obtain it through piracy,
this is making his sole criteria that he cannot afford a work
he has not said that he considered cases individually,

in this regard the question of the difference of ethics regarding he and i is very clear

Snozz has also not once acknowledged that piracy can or does hurt at least some authors or that it is wrong in at least some cases

it is his blanketing perspective that i was addressing in terms of ethics and i will stand by the difference between those who will take something without paying for it, because they cannot afford it, and those who will not

as for case by case situations, i agree that in some cases piracy does not harm authors and may even help them, this has always been my position, though i do not personally agree with taking things that cost money and not paying for them

Snozz has rather categorically denied that piracy is unethical, he has not said that it could be in some cases, rather he has said that it is the same as borrowing a book from a friend or a library and has taken the stance that it never equates to theft. I find that I do not agree with this position and that the ethics that he and i maintain are clearly distinct. For him this has been an argument about piracy in general, for me this has been about the negative effects i have seen piracy have upon people who i greatly respect, authors in the psychedelic community. As i said previously, i think piracy is theft, but that in some cases it is a good thing, a political tool, however that does not mean that i think theft or piracy are in and of themselves ethical, i think that as a stand alone concept that theft and piracy are fundamentally unethical but that they become acceptable under specific contexts.




agreed,
Snozz does not bring up that different contexts are different, so Endlessness, when you speak of points that have been forgotten, you are addressing my replies to him almost exclusively, while perhaps not considering that he has not conceded a single point, nor has he once agreed that a negative impact was even possible for piracy, let alone acknowledge that in some cases they are probable while in others improbable.

I found this to be a post worthy of consideration. I let an author in the psychedelic community read it and am waiting on his approval before i share his comments, and comment he did, if he does not give me permission i will not share them, but will paraphrase them.

it is nice to have the perspective of both the pirates and the authors

Keep in mind that the title of this thread is Stop Pirating Drug Culture Books, it is not Stop Piracy. I have never been interested in debating piracy, rather i wish to share that it is not only harming authors in the community, but it actually ends up preventing information from being shared and published in the end. The best way to protect the cause of information is to be aware of the threats it faces and piracy is among them.

I can appreciate what you are getting at but what this community and the authors of these books need to realize is that we ARE in the digital age. If the authors are concerned with profits and piracy, then they need to evolve with the times.

With today's technology, it is FAR easier to stay in direct contact with the people who actually purchase these books. I really like the Kickstarter idea because they can get all of the funding they need before they write the first chapter.

My point is that everyone should embrace the technology that we've been blessed with. If authors accept that piracy is inevitable then they should put a notice or foreword at the beginning of the book saying "If you enjoyed this book, please make a donation at www.mywebsite.com so I can continue to provide this information."

I personally feel that digital books and readers are FAR more sustainable than print books for several reasons.

The first is no trees are harmed for digital books. (very important to me)
The second is it is far easier to update digital content than printed content.
The third is more people will have access to the information and therefore build the reputation and awareness of the author faster.
The final is that there are people who are willing to donate if given the opportunity, myself included.

We are living in a very dynamic world and the only option for all of us, is to evolve or perish.

I look forward to hearing the response of the author you contacted.

ok, I am choosing to keep the author anonymous because this is not about who said what, instead it is about having the perspective of an author in the community:



I will add that this author knows just about every author in the psychedelic community as a friend and is very well respected by them.
The author also volunteers for many projects and studies, has several works published into the public domain, digitally and has several works online.

It's endless banter and my opinion is that not one damn person will change their ideas about this subject based on anybody else's rationale or argumentation techniques presented here.

Irrelevant...



Irrelevant...



I realize that it costs a lot of time and money to create and publish a book and as I said, the authors need to be compensated. Has this particular author opened up channels to allow people to donate to his cause? Does he have a webpage (that is easily navigational that accepts donations or sells the book directly)? Is his book on Amazon? Has he considered using an on-demand publishing company that does smaller runs? Has he considered selling an e-version of the book with some added perks? If not, then why not?

If he produces high quality content, I have no issue contributing. Also, there are many other ways for an author to be compensated, it just takes thinking outside of the box.

Most of the successful musicians these days realize that they cannot stop piracy and they don't whine and cry over it. They get innovative. Limited edition box sets, perks, bonuses and other things that you cannot download. The same thing could apply to authors. Just like the on the Kickstarter project from Dennis McKenna I posted earlier. If you donate x amount you get x perk.

Like I said, evolve or perish. There is more than one way to skin a cat.




This is not only preposterous but quite rude as well. I understand that he's a bit sore from losing income for the works he's created but is that really necessary? I personally do not consider piracy thievery if it is used as a way to preview the works and decide if it's worth my money or a donation.




Going to each individual site or getting lawyers on the case isn't going to do anyone any good.
It's wise that he doesn't anticipate anything changing because it's not going to. It is the authors job to market the book in new and innovative ways. It's unfortunate that one can no longer write a book, get it published and see the profits roll in. Not to mention the fact that entheogenic books don't really pull a lot of profit anyway. It's not like it's going to hit the NY Times best seller list. Even the great works of Terrence McKenna never hit it big like that.



Once again, has this author opened up the channels to allow people to help him? I believe pirates or not, the entheogenic community is full of love and wants to do the right thing. Is he just too proud to ask for help?



Yeah, like that's gonna happen...



You're correct, I am cheap and lazy. So?
I've created and shared works, all of them for free, because I enjoy doing it. I enjoy giving back and I don't expect any sort of compensation for my efforts. If I create something, it's for the simple joy of creation. When people are only motivated by money and not by passion, I believe there is a huge problem.



So you're saying that when you discovered a certain book was online, it's sales diminished? Are you sure that isn't because a proper marketing technique wasn't in place?

As a web developer, I know for a fact in this digital age, "if you build it, they will come" no longer applies. You have to let people know what is available and how to get to it.

I'd guarantee that if a newer and better marketing strategy was in place, you would see profit again.



Some people might believe that a PDF file is a bad idea, others would argue that it's the only way. There are thousands if not millions of people making a killing off of e-books. Not to mention that "production costs" are next to nil besides the time spent creating the book if a digital platform is used.



Once again, it comes down to thinking outside of the box.

Like I said previously, musicians created limited edition prints of their albums now with extra perks added. The smarter ones have created a way for their fans to purchase their works directly from them. Cut out the middle man and you get all of the profit.

Painters create limited edition, numbered prints to add more value to their works.

Software creators make "Shareware" or demos so you can try before you buy. You get a sample of the product and if you like it or want more features, you buy the full version.

I understand that enthogenic authors cater to very small percentage of the population and as such, profits will be smaller. Were you really expecting to get rich off of writing psychedelic books? Is piracy really the only culprit to blame here? Have you really put some thought into how you can maximize your profits and spread awareness about your product? Is it available to the vast majority of psychonauts? Before calling people lazy thieves, I suggest you go back to the drawing board and think of some additional ways that you could get your works into more peoples hands and set up a way for those people to pay you directly.

Melodic Catastrophe is right. The author should stop whinning about a time long past and should open up to new modes of distribution. I can say it a thousand times...people donate and support genuine members of the psychedelic community. Not rude, greedy individuals though who just do it for profit.

Moreover: The author should be grateful that his work is appreciated by other human beings! This should be the most important motivation. But obviously it is money instead.

If you guys knew what Shulgin thought of it and how it hurt him you would hate on him too?

It is a sad thing.

Good members of this community do donate to authors, by paying for the books they use.

Nobody who every wrote a book for this community ever thought of getting rich, but being able to pay for the cost of printing would be nice.

Te obvious facts are that piracy harms people, it harms authors and they do feel betrayed. It is a very serious and sad issue.

Piracy is clearly a failure to support members of this community.
The Shulgins are known to have that opinion, as do many other authors.
If you think that people like them are rude and greedy, then maybe you aren't as supportive as you think.

Many people feel that piracy is rude and greedy.