Why do people think it's ok to steal from authors?

I agree with you that people ought not to break the law or engage in internet piracy for moral reasons, but there are a few more general themes I’d like to draw out, if I may.

There are two reasons to my mind. Firstly people don’t think that intellectual property counts as property, ‘to steal’ is to dishonestly appropriate the property of another, and if you do not consider copying copyrighted works to be ‘property’ you are not actually stealing.

Copyright, and intellectual property (IP) generally, is awkward conceptually. Real (land) and personal property is finite and has the quality of excludability. I can exclude you from my land, my chair, my watch etc and I may have to for me to use my property effectively. The materials in which one can secure intellectual property rights do not inherently have the same level of excludability. My possession, use and enjoyment of a story or musical track does not lesson your ownership of it in the same way that my use of your watch would impinge upon your ownership.

As such intellectual property lacks a conceptual component which is central to other types of property. Historically we have virtually always considered land and chattels to be ‘property’, but when it comes to cultural works, ideas, names and secrets… we can trace their origins historically. For example copyright properly so-called finds its origins in the Statute of Anne 1709 and the Berne Convention 1887.

Indeed, the distinction between intellectual property and real and personal property exists in the law today. To refer to stealing music, or books etc is a legal misnomer (at least for the English lawyer) as to steal is a reference to the Theft Act 1968 whereas copyright infringement is dealt with under an entirely different body of rules in the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA). Indeed the relevant sections of the CDPA do not use the words ‘steal’ or ‘theft’ but infringement and copying.

The second reason builds on the first reason: one may simply not consider copyright to be justifiable.

The idea of the creator as a loan genius pulling entirely original work entirely out of his own mind just does not reflect the truth of the situation. Writers, composers, lyricists, artists draw on their respective traditions, their cultures: the works of others. This is especially true in music and literature. Therefore there is a psychological sense of communal cultural possession. I would describe a number of British authors as part of my cultural tradition.

The justifiability of copyright and IP generally is a massive area of debate which I am not going to attempt to summarise or talk through further. It is, however, a controversial and fascinating avenue of inquiry and it is certainly not cut and dry.

EDIT: I wasn’t arguing with you, I was just trying to give an answer to the question you asked. Whilst you’d never find me at a pro-copyright rally, I have the greatest of respect for authors and literature; literary copyright is a price that I’m very willing to pay for the continued production of literature. It gives far too much power to market forces and ‘normal’ people. But then again, we have awards and prizes to encourage first-class writing, although there’s probably more money for someone like Stephanie Meyer or JK Rowling than there is for someone less populist.

I reject the line between theory and practicality, or at least it’s application here because your question is a moral one and if we are to engage in moral inquiry we must consider the entity which we are dealing with. Furthermore too much good thinking is routinely written off ‘because it’s not practical’.

I've noticed the same thing; in greater numbers in the last month or so.

I do believe that the answers you've received so far are true: there is ignorance involved with some, laziness with others, the desire for instant gratification with yet others and, worst in my opinion, knowledge that it is theft but indifference to that fact.

I do believe that some think that anything in print should be available for free on the Internet, since you can get so much information (and disinformation, unfortunately) on it now. Perhaps the reasoning goes something like, "It's just a collection of words and words are plentiful and free online." That's merely a surmise and, perhaps, not a good one.

One thing is for sure: people who think it is fine to download a book in copyright for free (when not offered by either the author or publisher), are treating books as though they aren't the product of someone else's sweat and hard work. Whether or not they realize it, they are disrespecting that author's labor.

As far as I'm concerned, stealing someone's brainchild is no different than someone breaking into your home and stealing your money and property.

I'm not sure that I added anything to this, but the "ho-hum" attitude of some people does get to me.

I agree with you and the others who have answered. I am a published author. I don't make a lot of money. It basically boils down to a couple dollars on each book sold. That's not a lot seeing I'm not King or Koontz. I have a day job that helps pay my bills, and I write in the evening and weekends or as time allows. Though I would like this to be my money making career it is not. With that in mind, getting books illegally can hurt the author more than people realize. It can make a difference to someone like myself who is struggling to get his work out there to the people legitimately and make a name for himself. And maybe some might think well hey you are only out of a few dollars, but if you ever went grocery shopping in my shoes you'd see a few dollars makes a big difference.

I think it's split between two groups. The first don't really realize how serious it is, they think it's just convenient. The second know and don't care.

To be honest I never thought much about it until I got to know a few authors and realized just how disrespectful it is to their hard work. It's a total slap in the face to them, and I find it ironic that people say "I LOVE *insert author name here* where can I get their stuff for free?" because they clearly don't "love" that author if they're willing to rip them off and not acknowledge their hard work.

I think mostly people are simply uneducated as to the illegality and just don't think about it. I try to be civil to people asking for free stuff and explain nicely to them how illegal it is and tell them where they can get it for cheap legally.

But I have no patience for people who ask for pirated books on the net and then say "and don't anyone waste my time by telling me it's illegal"

Lately I've been on a campaign to shut down several blogs and other sites that are offering pirated books. I've been successful with a few and others I'm still waiting for a response on.

I don't personally have a problem with people sharing books between friends - I look at it as being the same as borrowing a book. But sites that provide the books for download publicly make me sick.

I completely know what you mean. Nothing's wrong with these people. They're too lazy to run over to the book store or to the library. They want it INSTANTLY on the internet, no matter how they get it. They just don't realize that it actually IS that big of a deal. I mean, once they get what they want, they don't care about anything else. Obviously, you didn't provide the site for them, and since the other person did, he/she got best answer.

I know...sad isn't it?

:)

They don't realize that authors are actually poor people who are trying to scrape a buck together while writing books for demanding fans, publishers and etc. Not all authors make millions of dollars like J.K. Rowling. I also think that humans in general mostly think of themselves first

I totally agree but some of these people actually scanned the novel's chapter in their computers after special editions of the books came out. I know it is wrong but i think it's all because of the excitement. But eventually (hopefully) it will die!

I understand where you are coming from, today i saw one that asked for the entire book breaking dawn, i mean really, its 5 days away and someone cant wait. but i also understand their side... im not saying its right but its easier, cheaper, its alot of things... why people think its okay though is beyond me. hopefully they know its wrong and feel guilty later but are justifying it for the moment with how badly they wanted it. as for your story about the girl and the site, kindof... i dont know, annoying. yes, that would be the best answer obviously with the question she asked but youd think that after all the downlooking she would have possibly said, "oh... thanks, but i think i'll skip it now that i realize its wrong." anyway, dont go judging people to harshly, because really, it's not illegal to borrow a friends book (and yes i'm now referring to the wonderful breaking dawn first chapter cuz i actually was just on a question that asked for that, ironic isn't it that the next question that was asked was for the first chapter) and read it... even if its a special edition. so i dont see how its illegal to read it somewhere else. but it is, so it still shouldnt be done. i hope you got that the right way. in summary, i totally side with you and its not right, but i also see where they are coming from. btw, i dont expect this to be the best answer, but im speaking truthfully and trying really hard not to sound biased cuz i did borrow my friends book to read the first chapter, does that mean i should go to jail, i certainly hope not...

I asked the exact same question a while ago. Honestly, how disrespectful (not to mention *lazy*) can you be?

And who would want to read a book off of a computer screen anyway? Just the thought of it makes my retinas burn.

Instant gratification at it's worst. (Or, best, depending on how you look at it.)

I hate those people. Authors and editors and publishers and designers spend so much time on getting the book (or movie, music, et cetera) out there, and then people aren't willing to spend ten dollars on it.

I'm baffled by it, too.