Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 03:15:43 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:08:14 PM
In both cases it takes materials, effort and time to produce the bricks or the novels, why one should be illegal for me to just go and grab while the other not?

Also, what do you mean "one should be illegal ... and the other not"? The point of the house example was that copying a book should be legal, just like copying a house as described would obviously be legal.

I think you have misread someone. You're the one who's been arguing that IP is property, but should also be handled differently from property.

Nop, the argument is if I should be able to take someone else's novel and print it and sell it without giving any money to the creator.

For the house analogy to work you need to see the house as the novel, the bricks as the words and the structure as the structure.

You didn't take my idea of lets write a novel, THAT's the idea or the idea of lets build a brick house, because thgat's the idea.

You took my finished work printed it and sold it without paying me.

Like to like would be you took my finished house and sold it without paying me.

Why one is illegal but the other shouldn't?

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:00:48 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 06, 2021, 03:55:05 PM
To borrow the line from Bioshock, is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

Whether it's physical goods, or The Great American Novel?

Though I think that line's specifically about taxes and regulations, Ayn Rand, the basis for Andrew Ryan, was terrible on IP. She and her supporters practically worship "the Intellect".

Why is it that an engineer earns more than a janitor? Isn't because of his intellect?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:56:47 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 03:10:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:08:14 PM
In both cases it takes materials, effort and time to produce the bricks or the novels, why one should be illegal for me to just go and grab while the other not?

You can't grab anyone's copy of their book. That is stealing, not copying.

But you can grab what cost me money, time and effort and go sell it without giving me money. Because that's not stealing because words and sentences...

When someone presses "Download", or "Copy" and then "Paste", do you find that words and sentences disappear from your local hard drive, or your own recollection? How can downloads ever be sold for money if downloading deprives someone of their copy? When I download my purchases on DriveThru, whose copies are disappearing and how? What if the copy in their database is the one that vanishes someday?

Copying is not stealing. It's obvious, irrefutable, and is just something we have to get over and live with.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:02:48 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:00:48 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 06, 2021, 03:55:05 PM
To borrow the line from Bioshock, is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

Whether it's physical goods, or The Great American Novel?

Though I think that line's specifically about taxes and regulations, Ayn Rand, the basis for Andrew Ryan, was terrible on IP. She and her supporters practically worship "the Intellect".

Why is it that an engineer earns more than a janitor? Isn't because of his intellect?

No, they're both paid to provide a service to the employer. You can be a highly intellectual janitor (more educated than the engineer, even), but you're not going to suddenly get an engineer's salary.

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:11:52 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:56:47 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 03:10:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:08:14 PM
In both cases it takes materials, effort and time to produce the bricks or the novels, why one should be illegal for me to just go and grab while the other not?

You can't grab anyone's copy of their book. That is stealing, not copying.

But you can grab what cost me money, time and effort and go sell it without giving me money. Because that's not stealing because words and sentences...

When someone presses "Download", or "Copy" and then "Paste", do you find that words and sentences disappear from your local hard drive, or your own recollection? How can downloads ever be sold for money if downloading deprives someone of their copy? When I download my purchases on DriveThru, whose copies are disappearing and how? What if the copy in their database is the one that vanishes someday?

Copying is not stealing. It's obvious, irrefutable, and is just something we have to get over and live with.

When you download from DT you either paid for it or it's free or it's PWYW, therefore it can't be theft. Just like using what's under public domain or an open license can't be theft.

BUT, when you take my not open content novel, copy and sell it that's theft and there's no arguing about it.

I worked on it, I incurred in expenses on it, I invested time on it and creativity too. But you think it's perfectly A-Okay to just take it and sell it because words and sentences.

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:13:21 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:02:48 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:00:48 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 06, 2021, 03:55:05 PM
To borrow the line from Bioshock, is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

Whether it's physical goods, or The Great American Novel?

Though I think that line's specifically about taxes and regulations, Ayn Rand, the basis for Andrew Ryan, was terrible on IP. She and her supporters practically worship "the Intellect".

Why is it that an engineer earns more than a janitor? Isn't because of his intellect?

No, they're both paid to provide a service to the employer. You can be a highly intellectual janitor (more educated than the engineer, even), but you're not going to suddenly get an engineer's salary.

Why is it that one job pays more than the other? Because of the intellect required to do it, same intellect you seem to despise.

Why is a brick maker able to protect his work but a writer shouldn't?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:01:12 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 03:15:43 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:08:14 PM
In both cases it takes materials, effort and time to produce the bricks or the novels, why one should be illegal for me to just go and grab while the other not?

Also, what do you mean "one should be illegal ... and the other not"? The point of the house example was that copying a book should be legal, just like copying a house as described would obviously be legal.

I think you have misread someone. You're the one who's been arguing that IP is property, but should also be handled differently from property.

Nop, the argument is if I should be able to take someone else's novel and print it and sell it without giving any money to the creator.

For the house analogy to work you need to see the house as the novel, the bricks as the words and the structure as the structure.

You didn't take my idea of lets write a novel, THAT's the idea or the idea of lets build a brick house, because thgat's the idea.

You took my finished work printed it and sold it without paying me.

Like to like would be you took my finished house and sold it without paying me.

Why one is illegal but the other shouldn't?

You're not understanding the analogy. It's not about the idea to build the house; it's about the information gained from watching the house be built, and using that information to create an identical house, despite having not spent any of the time or money that the original builder spent on creating the design.

We can skip the "watching it being built" and say the next door neighbor borrowed the blueprint for your house for his reading enjoyment. He then scanned it into his computer without your permission (this is pressing "Ctrl+C" on your novel PDF). Then he built an identical house (pressed "Ctrl+V") without having done any of the work to create the blueprint (writing the novel).

Now, to put the cherry on top, he goes and puts his new identical house on the market and sells it.

Are you trying to say that should be illegal?

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:28:26 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:01:12 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 03:15:43 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 03:08:14 PM
In both cases it takes materials, effort and time to produce the bricks or the novels, why one should be illegal for me to just go and grab while the other not?

Also, what do you mean "one should be illegal ... and the other not"? The point of the house example was that copying a book should be legal, just like copying a house as described would obviously be legal.

I think you have misread someone. You're the one who's been arguing that IP is property, but should also be handled differently from property.

Nop, the argument is if I should be able to take someone else's novel and print it and sell it without giving any money to the creator.

For the house analogy to work you need to see the house as the novel, the bricks as the words and the structure as the structure.

You didn't take my idea of lets write a novel, THAT's the idea or the idea of lets build a brick house, because thgat's the idea.

You took my finished work printed it and sold it without paying me.

Like to like would be you took my finished house and sold it without paying me.

Why one is illegal but the other shouldn't?

You're not understanding the analogy. It's not about the idea to build the house; it's about the information gained from watching the house be built, and using that information to create an identical house, despite having not spent any of the time or money that the original builder spent on creating the design.

We can skip the "watching it being built" and say the next door neighbor borrowed the blueprint for your house for his reading enjoyment. He then scanned it into his computer without your permission (this is pressing "Ctrl+C" on your novel PDF). Then he built an identical house (pressed "Ctrl+V") without having done any of the work to create the blueprint (writing the novel).

Now, to put the cherry on top, he goes and puts his new identical house on the market and sells it.

Are you trying to say that should be illegal?

So you watched me write my novel, now go write YOUR own, with your own words and sentences. I'm not saying gramatical structure should have copyright, but you taking what I built, with my effort, my money, time and creativity and selling it is theft.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 02:57:48 PM
Why is it different producing bricks than producing a creative work? Time, materials and efort go into both, and the creative work gets something the bricks don't, meaning ANYONE can learn to make bricks, not so to writting the next Harry Potter.

Why can't I go and without paying for your work take your bricks?

The analogy doesn't make sense. If you "TAKE" my bricks, I lose them. If you COPY my work now we have two copies. I lost nothing. That's why I said I was okay with my books being pirated (it gave me more visibility at the very least), but not okay with someone stealing my wallet.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:32:53 PM
So you watched me write my novel, now go write YOUR own, with your own words and sentences. I'm not saying gramatical structure should have copyright, but you taking what I built, with my effort, my money, time and creativity and selling it is theft.

It is not comparable to theft and not even IP laws consider it theft.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 06, 2021, 04:44:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 02:57:48 PM
Why is it different producing bricks than producing a creative work? Time, materials and efort go into both, and the creative work gets something the bricks don't, meaning ANYONE can learn to make bricks, not so to writting the next Harry Potter.

Why can't I go and without paying for your work take your bricks?

The analogy doesn't make sense. If you "TAKE" my bricks, I lose them. If you COPY my work now we have two copies. I lost nothing. That's why I said I was okay with my books being pirated (it gave me more visibility at the very least), but not okay with someone stealing my wallet.

If I copy your work and then sell it you lost my money and all the money I manage to get from selling your game.

Who come that's not theft?

Why is it that you didn't put your game freely available to anyone to download for free or PWYW way?

The Pirate either wasn't going to pay for it anyway or might buy the phisical product if he likes what he saw plus you got visibility as a small developer.

Not the same thing as me printing and selling your game without giving you any money.

I liked The Trove because it was like an online museum of the rpg industry and rpg history. There are a few books I found on the Trove that I later purchased in print that I would not have originally.

My own opinion about online piracy is it has no effect on sells of physical product. There have been enough examples over the last decade of games selling well even when the pdfs are either sold really cheap, like in Humble Bundles, or given out for free, like with Eclipse Phase 1e (which the entire 1e game line was put out for free on pdf and physical sells did well enough), to show that online piracy is just an argument they complain about to stir up noise.

Paizo quite often sells Pathfinder pdfs in bundles where you can get 10 to 20 pdfs for like $20, and that's in addition to Paizo putting all of their games online for free, and the company still sells physical books well.

Then you have other games with full SRD's online, like Dungeon World and Blades in the Dark and Fate, and those books sell relatively well.

Online piracy is BS.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:49:52 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 06, 2021, 04:44:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 02:57:48 PM
Why is it different producing bricks than producing a creative work? Time, materials and efort go into both, and the creative work gets something the bricks don't, meaning ANYONE can learn to make bricks, not so to writting the next Harry Potter.

Why can't I go and without paying for your work take your bricks?

The analogy doesn't make sense. If you "TAKE" my bricks, I lose them. If you COPY my work now we have two copies. I lost nothing. That's why I said I was okay with my books being pirated (it gave me more visibility at the very least), but not okay with someone stealing my wallet.

If I copy your work and then sell it you lost my money and all the money I manage to get from selling your game.

Who come that's not theft?

Paizo did well stealing D&D 3.5 from WotC. Just made a few tweaks, gave it new art. They stile the game within the loopholes the OGL provided. Not something WotC saw coming when the company first put the OGL out.

Most of the OSR is built on the "stealing" of older game systems via the same OGL loopholes.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:49:52 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 06, 2021, 04:44:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 02:57:48 PM
Why is it different producing bricks than producing a creative work? Time, materials and efort go into both, and the creative work gets something the bricks don't, meaning ANYONE can learn to make bricks, not so to writting the next Harry Potter.

Why can't I go and without paying for your work take your bricks?

The analogy doesn't make sense. If you "TAKE" my bricks, I lose them. If you COPY my work now we have two copies. I lost nothing. That's why I said I was okay with my books being pirated (it gave me more visibility at the very least), but not okay with someone stealing my wallet.

If I copy your work and then sell it you lost my money and all the money I manage to get from selling your game.

Who come that's not theft?

Why is it that you didn't put your game freely available to anyone to download for free or PWYW way?

The Pirate either wasn't going to pay for it anyway or might buy the phisical product if he likes what he saw plus you got visibility as a small developer.

Not the same thing as me printing and selling your game without giving you any money.

I did put a few books for free or PWYW but people are still mostly used to the old way of doing things. If I were in the US I might as well use kickstarter to fund my stuff and them give it away (I think Eclipse Phase did that and I backed the KS).

Why would people buy my game from you? To save a few dollars and avoid supporting me at the same time? I doubt you could even make much money form that, since my margins are not that great... If you owned a RPG store, you'd ruin your own reputation by doing that, and only make me more visible. I wouldn't "lose" a penny since I'm not able to make my own store anyway, I only sell through DTRPG. And if you try to sell my stuff on DTRPG I'd take it to DTRPG and I'm betting they'd fix it, or risk ruining their own reputation.

People either want to support me or not. If they don't have two dollars to buy my book they are welcome to pirate until they have some disposable income. And if you want to print and sell my stuff... well, anyone buying that was probably not my customer in the first place.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:18:00 PM

Quote from: Oddend on October 06, 2021, 04:13:21 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:02:48 PM
Why is it that an engineer earns more than a janitor? Isn't because of his intellect?

No, they're both paid to provide a service to the employer. You can be a highly intellectual janitor (more educated than the engineer, even), but you're not going to suddenly get an engineer's salary.

Why is it that one job pays more than the other? Because of the intellect required to do it, same intellect you seem to despise.

Ayn Rand is one of my all-time favorite thinkers, but she's not my high priest. My shelf is mostly full of classic books on philosophy, economics, history, theology, math, design, programming (in addition to the RPGs). I wouldn't say I despise the human intellect. Rather, it's out of my love of learning that I've come to despise the IP myth (I used to be an IP protectionist too).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:18:00 PM
Why is a brick maker able to protect his work but a writer shouldn't?

Writers can protect any property they have, just like the brick maker. Just like nobody is allowed to steal a brick maker's finished bricks, nobody is allowed to steal an author's crates full of offset print copies of their new novel.

The information inside those print copies can't be property, though.

Seriously, just watch this talk (again, from a career patent attorney): Intellectual Property - The Root of All Evil | Stephan Kinsella

If you're serious about publishing, it'll save you a lot of anxiety down the road.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:49:52 PM
If I copy your work and then sell it you lost my money and all the money I manage to get from selling your game.

Who come that's not theft?

This is just a logical fallacy; he didn't lose that money, since it was never in his possession. He may have lost a few sales opportunities, but opportunities are not property.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:49:52 PM
Why is it that you didn't put your game freely available to anyone to download for free or PWYW way?

A common way to monetize public-domain-dedicated works is to charge for the initial download, and just politely ask that your fans will not share the download willy-nilly (though they're certainly allowed to). This makes the paid download the easiest way for most people to grab the work, make sure they have the latest version, and get free updates. If it's a reasonable price, most people aren't going to bother scouring the internet for the free copy, since buying it will actually have a lower cost than "pirating" it, and can have lasting benefit.

This is the strategy behind Steam's massive success: "provide a better service than the pirates".

Quote from: RebelSky on October 06, 2021, 04:55:57 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 04:49:52 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 06, 2021, 04:44:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 02:57:48 PM
Why is it different producing bricks than producing a creative work? Time, materials and efort go into both, and the creative work gets something the bricks don't, meaning ANYONE can learn to make bricks, not so to writting the next Harry Potter.

Why can't I go and without paying for your work take your bricks?

The analogy doesn't make sense. If you "TAKE" my bricks, I lose them. If you COPY my work now we have two copies. I lost nothing. That's why I said I was okay with my books being pirated (it gave me more visibility at the very least), but not okay with someone stealing my wallet.

If I copy your work and then sell it you lost my money and all the money I manage to get from selling your game.

Who come that's not theft?

Paizo did well stealing D&D 3.5 from WotC. Just made a few tweaks, gave it new art. They stile the game within the loopholes the OGL provided. Not something WotC saw coming when the company first put the OGL out.

Most of the OSR is built on the "stealing" of older game systems via the same OGL loopholes.

By your logic all of the Linux ecosystem is full of theft.

It can't be theft if it's under an open content license, or then the copyleft license is also theft, and so is the CC0 and the OpenSoftware license and the public domain.