121

I illegally download almost all the books I need for my studies. While I'm more than happy to give a middle finger to the publisher mafia, it does of course mean that the author of the book is not appropriately compensated for their work.

But: it is well-known that professors do not make substantial amounts of money for each copy sold of their textbook. Perhaps 5–15 % of the sales price of each unit sold. This usually corresponds to roughly 5–10 dollars.

With that in mind, would it be appropriate to simply send those odd 10 dollars to the author of the book that I am illegally downloading? If you are a professor who authored a book, how would you feel about this?

Wrzlprmft
  • 61,194
  • 18
  • 189
  • 288
James
  • 1,167
  • 2
  • 8
  • 5
  • 2
    Comments about book prizes, alternative solutions, and comments as answers have been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment. – Wrzlprmft Nov 19 '18 at 06:41
  • 3
    While this is a fair and valid question, it raises ethical ideas that would be better discussed on another forum. OK I don't see ethics, but philosophy or somewhere in that direction. – RedSonja Nov 19 '18 at 07:48
  • 5
    "...would it be appropiate to..." This seems to be a rather subjective term. You should define "appropriate" before (and then the answer will probably become clear to you already). For a Q&A like the StackeExchanges this is not a good fit, since answers will mostly be opinionated and akin to just polls where nobody learns anything. One can possibly pose different questions that would be quite interesting (something like "Why are scientific text books so expensive?" or "Why are authors only paid a small share of the total selling price?"). – NoDataDumpNoContribution Nov 19 '18 at 10:02
  • 4
    Could you clarify what you mean by "illegally downloading"? In most jurisdictions, just downloading "pirated" media is perfectly legal. The specifics might matter. – Ruther Rendommeleigh Nov 19 '18 at 12:53
  • 1
    Sadly none of the answers so far have discussed about the possibility that the author(s) is no longer alive. They solely focused on alive authors, dismissing the case of dead authors. If one does like you did (download almost all the books for your studies), then the probability to download at least 1 book from a dead author(s) is non negligible. Yet this case has been totally ignored thus far...! – untreated_paramediensis_karnik Nov 25 '18 at 19:45
  • 1
    Also: I wonder: How many answers have been downvoted into oblivion? (I presume they're largely saying yes, and mods can answer the question.)

    I sought to paypal some money to some folks in India who had done something awesome (file a legal case about censorship and coercion). They didn't respond. I guess they (or their email filters) thought I was a scammer, and I wouldn't blame them for the mistake. Maybe I should send cash.

    – WHO'sNoToOldRx4Covid-CENSORED Jul 30 '22 at 07:35
  • @WHO: How many answers have been downvoted into oblivion? (I presume they're largely saying yes, and mods can answer the question.) – There are some deleted answers, none of which largely says yes and the only one of which receiving a considerable amount of downvotes was a clear non-answer. – Wrzlprmft Jul 30 '22 at 10:27

17 Answers17

182

With that in mind, would it be appropriate to simply send those odd 10 dollars to the author of the book that I am illegally downloading?

First, I would be concerned about your legal exposure. You would be effectively admitting piracy.

Second, you cannot unilaterally change the terms of sale. When the professor published the book, they agreed to sell it through the publisher in exchange for certain terms. The legal and (in my view) ethical options are to accept or decline these terms; you cannot invent and execute your own terms instead, even if they seem reasonable. In short, this is a rationalization. (That said, I personally am sympathetic to your concerns about publishing companies exploiting college students.)

Thus, the "appropriate" thing to do is to buy the books through legal channels.

If you are a professor who authored a book, how would you feel about this?

Not a professor, but I have taught and written a book with thousands of copies sold. I'm sure I am losing money due to piracy, but I have never received a payment like you describe.

  • Realistically, if I were to receive cash anonymously, I would probably chuckle and pocket the cash, or maybe set it aside for a few years to see if anything came of it.
  • If I received money from a known student, I would be very concerned about the appearance of impropriety, and would not accept it. I would also be concerned about whether I should report the piracy, though I probably wouldn't.
  • If this "caught on" and I was receiving a non-negligible amount of money from many pirates, I would have to talk to the publisher and seek guidance.
cag51
  • 67,924
  • 25
  • 181
  • 247
128

I find the moralistic tone of some of the other answers a bit distasteful, and also unhelpful. It’s pretty clear to me that you didn’t come here to ask for a general lecture about the pros and cons of piracy of textbooks and other digital content, and that is the sort of knowledge that already exists in a zillion different places and isn’t worth repeating. You had specific questions that aren’t addressed anywhere else, so I’ll try to answer them.

With that in mind, would it be appropiate to simply send those odd 10 dollars to the author of the book that I am illegally downloading?

I don’t find anything inappropriate about the act of sending $10 to a book author, no matter the reason. However, I should emphasize that that doesn’t mean that I think everything you’ve described yourself doing is “appropriate”. And to the extent that some of the other things you are doing are inappropriate, they will still be inappropriate even if you send $10 to book authors.

If you are a professor who authored a book, how would you feel about this?

Well, I am a professor who authored a book.* I would be a little amused, but mostly indifferent. I wouldn’t think more of you for doing it, but I wouldn’t think less of you (compared to my opinion of someone who pirated my book but didn’t send me $10, that is) either. I would likely think that you had decent intentions, but were expressing them in a way that was somewhat misguided.

Should I send professors 10 dollars for illegally downloading their books?

The sending of $10 to authors by itself is not a terrible idea and on the face of it is mostly just harmless and inconsequential (as opposed to the act of piracy itself, which is a lot more consequential but is not what you asked about, so I won’t discuss it). I’d still advise against it, but not for any of the reasons other people mentioned. Mostly I think that if you went ahead with it it would be a way for you to delude yourself into thinking that this act cleanses your conscience and absolves you of ethical responsibility for the act of illegally downloading the book. It is a kind of a cop-out: you want to download books illegally but also want to think that you’re an ethical person, so you’ve come up with this plan to allow yourself to think that you’ve achieved both goals but for a fraction of the “normal” price. Well, I’m afraid you don’t get off so easily. Ethics doesn’t work that way.

To summarize, I can’t tell you what you should do, but whatever you do, my advice is, own your actions. If you choose to download books illegally, do so after informing yourself about precisely what that means and what the consequences (ethical and otherwise) are — for yourself, for book authors, for publishers, for other readers and people who would have become readers of books that might never get published, etc — and make sure you can defend your decision and be at peace with it. But don’t go for half-baked solutions like sending some pittance to the book author to help yourself feel better and pretend you don’t need to think about the issue anymore. The truth is, you do need to think more about the issue. It is a complicated issue and the level of thinking about it where I think you’re currently at is only beginning to scratch the surface of its true complexity.

Thanks for the interesting question!


*Actually my book cannot be pirated since I give the digital copy away for free on my website (for a variety of reasons, including the knowledge that if I don’t then a pirated copy would likely be available anyway), with my publisher’s permission of course. What I wrote above about how I would feel refers to my best attempt at imagining a hypothetical scenario in which I wrote a book that I was not giving away digitally for free. But I think it’s a fairly accurate guess anyway.

Dan Romik
  • 189,176
  • 42
  • 427
  • 636
  • 42
    The legal ramifications of sending money to someone to make amends for piracy is not something to be taken lightly. It is not only about the taxes the reciever has to pay, but now the reciever is selling bootleg copies of his work, the publisher might intervene quite harshly. – Bent Nov 18 '18 at 11:42
  • 14
    What disturbs me about the whole idea is the following: the legal aspect is the legal aspect and there are various views on that (I support the Open Access perspective; the EU has made a great effort to enforce it) - however, the OP tries to recruit the prof into their view of how legitimate author reimbursement should look like. This is what really disturbs me about this proposal; not every accepter of the money would realise that they play along the arbitrarily made-up game rules of OP. – Captain Emacs Nov 18 '18 at 11:55
  • 36
    @Bent if someone sent me $10 without asking me, I wouldn’t consider myself to have “stolen bootleg copies of my work”, nor do I think that I would be legally complicit in an illegal sale in any way (think about it like this: it would be very problematic if the law had such a loophole that enabled you to make someone a criminal just by sending them $10). It should be very clear, what OP decides to do is %100 on him. – Dan Romik Nov 18 '18 at 15:35
  • 1
    @Bent as for taxes: yeah maybe, but I think you’re overthinking this. The professor can always decide to give the money to charity/a random needy person, or even throw it in the trash (or report it in their taxes like any other income). Again, everyone is responsible for their own actions, so I don’t see why what the professor does with the money should be of any concern to OP. (But in general I completely agree with you it’s good to be aware of legal issues related to this question, which are quite important.) – Dan Romik Nov 18 '18 at 15:39
  • 4
    "think about it like this: it would be very problematic if the law had such a loophole that enabled you to make someone a criminal just by sending them $10". You've got it wrong. A person can not be made a criminal by someone sending him money. But you force the person to do something. If the person decides to keep the money it is income, the reason in this case is compensation for a bootleg copy. Now he is in conflict with the contract with the publisher. Return the money? But to whom? I assume the money is send without return address. The only option left is to report it to the police. cont – Bent Nov 18 '18 at 16:26
  • 6
    cont.. if a bank in error puts money into your account you are required by law to report it to the bank. You cannot just leave the money, or worse spend it, even if it is not your fault. In this case you either know the money is for a bootleg copy of a book or, in fact, even worse you do not know what it is for. The law require you to assume the worst in such a case. You are not a criminal for someone sending you money, but you are for not making every effort to make sure you are not doing something wrong. – Bent Nov 18 '18 at 16:31
  • 6
    @Bent ok, I understand but I think we’re coming at this from different angles. If it were me receiving the money, I would regard it as a gift from an enthusiastic reader (regardless of what the reader claims it is, which is irrelevant from my point of view), and not worry about any of the stuff that you’re worrying about, except maybe the tax issue, which I would consult my accountant about. It is not my responsibility to help law authorities or publishers combat piracy (even of my own book), and I never promised my publisher not to accept gifts from readers. – Dan Romik Nov 18 '18 at 16:58
  • 1
    @DanRomik I hope you never get any money from someone who has sold weed or similar in US state that you do not live in. If you do, you will know how to spell 'felony' and 'end of career'. I do not know of any jurisdiction in the world where you are not supposed to know where every cent of your income comes from and if you do not know you yourself is at fault. – Bent Nov 19 '18 at 00:58
  • 9
    @Bent that’s really interesting, thanks. I’ll cross that bridge when I get to it I guess. By the way, any chance you can tell me the name of the felony I’d be committing by receiving money of unknown origin? I’m not disbelieving you, just curious. – Dan Romik Nov 19 '18 at 01:11
  • 4
    The comments suggests that the publishers don't violate any ethical standards and are thus blameless. That's very seldom the case. The publishers generally don't uphold their ethical responsibility to make their knowledge accessible to every human on earth. According to the universal human right declaration (Art. 28) everybody has the right to participate in the scientific advancement. Art. 28 recognizes that authors have a right to protection of the moral and material interests but doesn't see that right to interest protection belonging with publishers. – Christian Nov 19 '18 at 13:18
  • 7
    @Bent if someone send me money with a comment saying "Thanks for your great book!" I do not see a chance to get in legal trouble for that. Dan Romik: I like your view on this situation this time – undefined Nov 19 '18 at 13:25
  • 12
    @Bent By that legal theory, wouldn't every church that had members involved with the Mafia be legally complicit with their activity? If an entity could be prosecuted for receiving anonymous donations from a dubious source, I'd think a rather large number of charitable organizations would be unable to continue operating. – jmbpiano Nov 19 '18 at 14:57
  • 10
    @Bent Do you have a source for any of this? There is no presumption an individual will be able to account for every penny of their income, and there is certainly no requirement for an individual to attempt find out where the people paying them money got that money (if they have actual knowledge that the money they are being paid is illicit then that is a very different situation). – TimothyAWiseman Nov 19 '18 at 17:45
  • 2
    @Christian "The publishers generally don't uphold their ethical responsibility to make their knowledge accessible to every human on earth" - assuming that is an ethical responsibility at all, and that it is their responsibility in particular. –  Nov 20 '18 at 19:19
  • @Christian Would you please try to craft an answer which answers OP and fits more information about what you just said into it? I am interested in hearing more about what you've mentioned. Is it binding in any way on anyone? Even if not, is it officially recognized or supported by any governments or other major groups? – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 20:30
  • 2
    @Aaron You can look up the Universal Human Right Declaration online. He's misquoting article 27 (not 28), which does not confer a human right to freely access any and all scientific content. It says in full: "(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. (2) Everyone has the right to protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author." –  Nov 21 '18 at 03:40
  • 1
    @Aaron Article 28 says "Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized." –  Nov 21 '18 at 03:41
  • 1
    @Bent, are you seriously saying a donation of negligible amount is taxable income as if it were the payment for a good/service? – Andrea Lazzarotto Nov 22 '18 at 17:14
  • @AndreaLazzarotto Of course. If a student sends money to the author of the book because they are the author of the book - why would that not be a payment for goods or services? As long as there are few students doing this, my income tax declaration has an exemption you get if you did not sell stuff leading to earnings of > 400 € in total in the year in question, though. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Nov 23 '18 at 23:05
  • @cbeleites you are assuming a direct business transaction between the student and the book author. If Alice and Bob agree to exchange a PDF of a book for 10$, this is a sale contract. If Alice "steals" property from Bob without Bob agreeing and then decides to donate 10$ to Bob, there is no sale and no contract. The amount is negligible so not taxable. – Andrea Lazzarotto Nov 24 '18 at 16:56
  • 1
    This answer apperas to just have a hand wave "clearly it's ethically wrong" but I don't find that compelling at all - under Kant's 2nd Imperative we can see 'if everyone does it, what happens' and, well, the author gets well compensated; he continues to produce work and the "rent seeking" of the publisher gets quashed. Under an ethical framework that doesn't think media mega-corps should have been allowed to buy-off politicians to get massive extensions to copyright this seems pretty ethical. – pbhj Nov 25 '18 at 22:27
  • So would you say that once this "complexity" is taken to account, the current system is actually pretty good and the prices pretty sensible? – The_Sympathizer Jul 31 '19 at 13:42
35

Actually, what you should do, if you want to behave ethically, is purchase legal copies of the books you've stolen.


This answer has generated a lot of controversy. Let me explain a bit of the background and thinking behind it. It will take me more than one edit to be complete, so please be patient. Most of this annex is derived from comments I've made elsewhere here.

First, I don't make any legal argument at all. Everything I've written here is that it is unethical to unilaterally break a social contract, substituting your own terms, taking something that isn't yours and benefitting from it without compensating the producers (both authors and publishers) who have expended resources in its creation. It is an insult to creators. I haven't discussed legality. Others here seem to be trying, like the OP, to find a way to make it sort of ok, when there is an obvious, clean, and simple solution. Purchase a legal copy. Other "solutions" are just self delusion.

The OP and others here seems to believe that the publishing industry is itself immoral and should be combatted. I agree in part with that, but only in part. But that doesn't change the ethics of this action (downloading without payment). But most people who think that publishers just rip them off, haven't thought about the problem very deeply. The main costs in publishing (paper or electronic) are acquisitions, reviewing, editing, layout/graphics, manufacture/hosting, and marketing. This in addition to the time and effort of the author(s) who produce the work. All of these are expensive undertakings and require skilled professionals.

Some of the work is done by volunteers (often reviewing). But copy editors, who improve the language and layout/book-designers etc. need to be paid. Many of the people in acquisitions, editing, and marketing need to be on the road visiting (and paying for) every conference they can find. And the marketers give away a lot of books, also.

Some here seem to think that the costs of books etc are just too high, but they have always been high. I just read that textbooks account for about 1% of the cost of education. A Calculus book (e.g. Stewart) now costs about 10 times what mine did in the early 1960s. But so does everything else. Food, housing, transportation, etc. The kindle edition of Stewart is only about 5-6 times what my hardcover was back then. I remember spending about $100 for most of a year's books and was horrified. Now is is said to be about $900. BTW, I still have that book, so it was a good investment.

Note also that the price charged on successful books includes the amortized cost of creating, but not manufacturing, the ones that never sell. It is hard to predict a winner so publishers create a lot of failed books; several for every successful one. If the price difference between ebooks and hardcovers is an indication, about half the cost is due to manufacturing. Which means that much of the cost of trying to develop most books is never recovered. So publishers absorb those costs initially, but include it in price of books that sell. This is the "cost" of choice that we pay. One model is to charge back the development cost of a failed book to the author. A clear disincentive to write.

Another reason for the high cost of all but elementary books is that the total market is both small and divided up by the presence of several book options. Choice again. If we all used Johnson & Kiokemeister's Calculus with Analytic Geometry from 1960 (a good book) then the cost would be very small. But there are new books to choose from, increasing the cost of all since most are unsuccessful, but still eat up development resources.

Some have stated that publishers have a monopoly and that they exploit it. But publishers don't have a legal monopoly. Anyone can attack their business model. Anyone can offer competition. If their profit margins are outrageous then someone has a lot of incentive to do it. But no one has yet been able to put all the pieces together (from acquisition to distribution) to make it any cheaper for buyers. Some models replace paid employees with volunteers and that works up to a point, but hasn't been shown to scale. Apple's profit margin is 22%. McGraw is 25% (one of the highest). Creating things is hard work from a lot of people.

Don't get the idea here that I'm against a system in which IP is free to use. But there needs to be some incentive to produce it or it won't get produced at all. I've written some ebooks, actually, and have produced software that has been downloaded (free) more than 15,000 times. But that was my choice to do, not someone else's decision who tried to override my wishes.

My preferred solution is to work toward a system in which authors are compensated separately from book sales, say via grants funded via tax revenues. This makes the creation of IP truly a social good and a shared responsibility. Books could then be distributed for free or sold for manufacturing cost, or whatever.

My biggest complaint about the publishing industry, actually, is simply that they don't spend enough effort on marketing their titles after two years. Most authors get almost all of their revenue in those first two years because of this. Always on to the new thing.

But still, my argument here is an ethical one, not a legal or economic argument. It is wrong to substitute your decision for that of the creator of something of value - especially if it is of value to you.

Buffy
  • 363,966
  • 84
  • 956
  • 1,406
  • 21
    @Buffy: I voted your answer down because it fits the too-common antipattern of answering an ethical question of the form "how can I do this better?" by "you should not do it at all". There are some cases where this is a good answer, but this isn't one of them, and in either case the answer is comment-length and devoid of justification. I am used to much better from you. – darij grinberg Nov 18 '18 at 00:28
  • 34
    I agree with this answer except for the word “stolen”. Digital piracy is ethically problematic and in many (possibly most) circumstances unethical, but it is not identical to, and should not be conflated with, theft. I downvoted the answer because of this inaccuracy, but will undo my downvote if you edit the answer to correct this issue. – Dan Romik Nov 18 '18 at 05:40
  • 21
    Downvoted because you don't offer an argument, merely an assertion. It's not self-evident that downloading books illegally is immoral. –  Nov 18 '18 at 15:08
  • 1
    I moved longer discussions in comments to chat and just left the hooks, i.e., the direct criticisms of the answer. Please continue discussing in chat. Also, please read this FAQ before posting another comment. – Wrzlprmft Nov 19 '18 at 06:50
  • 5
    Upvoted because this is the answer of what to do if you find yourself in possession of a pirated book. 1. You inspect it and you don't need it, so you delete it. 2. You decide you like it so you buy a legal copy. Sounds daft, but a friend once gave me pirated copies of his favourite books. I read a few paragraphs of each, then bought the ones I liked, and deleted the others. – RedSonja Nov 19 '18 at 07:43
  • 2
    I downvoted because you tell a bunch of just-so stories about academic publishing that just don't correspond to reality. For starters: prices in 2018 are about 8.5 times what they were in 1960. Many calculus textbook are over $200 now. Calculus textbooks were certainly not over $23 in 1960! The inflation in textbook prices has wildly exceeded inflation, as many online sources attest. – Pete L. Clark Nov 19 '18 at 19:26
  • 2
    @PeteL.Clark, pretty sure you are wrong. I was there. Above $100 for five books with Calc being the most expensive. And I estimated 10 times (back of the envelope), which is in line with general inflation. A house that was then $20K is now about ten times that. Nearly everything that has material and labor inputs as the dominant costs - like publishing. Tuition to a private was then about $2k per year. Now ??? – Buffy Nov 19 '18 at 19:32
  • 3
    "Some have stated that publishers have a monopoly and that they exploit it." There are a bajillion publishers out there, so to call it a monopoly is nonsensical. Calling the entire industry a monopoly is as nonsensical as saying "if you want a degree you have to attend a university and therefore the higher education industry is a monopoly". – Allure Nov 19 '18 at 22:57
  • 1
    OP has not stolen anything, and it is unreasonable for people who are not rich (i.e. most people, including most students) to purchase copies of the academic books they read. People don't have this kind of money available, and even if they did, it would not benefit society for them to make these payments. -1. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 19:21
  • 8
    @einpoklum So since I am not rich, it would not be reasonable for me to pay this much for a nice meal at a Michelin star restaurant, and hence it would be completely moral to skip out without paying? – Tobias Kildetoft Nov 20 '18 at 20:05
  • 5
    @TobiasKildetoft: I resent you considering access to academic material to be similar to enjoying a meal at a Michelin-star restaurant. Studying is not indulgence. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 20:12
  • 3
    @einpoklum Access to specific academic material. For most purposes, you could make do with freely available materials, but it is more efficient to pick a specific book. Sure, the restaurant analogy is strained to bursting point, but that was to highlight the difference between something which is necessary and something which is better but more expensive. – Tobias Kildetoft Nov 20 '18 at 20:16
  • 6
    @einpoklum, curious that you value an expensive meal, but don't value the effort and resources that go into the creation of a textbook. "Academic material" doesn't create itself. The fact that the final result may be only 'bits' doesn't mean that real resources weren't expended in the organization of those bits. Or is it just that "it is easy to steal" so "it is ok to steal"? Hmmm. There's that word again. Would you prefer "illegal taking"? The OP said it was illegal, here, and tagged it with ethics. I focused on the ethical part, actually and illustrated some of the actual resources. – Buffy Nov 20 '18 at 20:24
  • 4
    @einpoklum, if you download an ebook and discard it immediately, no harm, no foul. But if you download it without paying and gain value from it yourself, it isn't the same thing at all. Why is the work of a chef to be valued and that of an author and editor not to be valued? This is the world you want, but not the world that is. You can, of course, impose your will by downloading, but it is still unethical. – Buffy Nov 20 '18 at 20:29
  • 1
    @Buffy: I did not suggest I don't value the effort and resources that go into the creation of a book. But a book being valued work does not imply prospective readers of the book should pay money in order to read it. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 21:19
  • 9
    @einpoklum. My library, will actually let you check out e-books without charge. It isn't the same thing at all. A university could, in theory, provide e-books after making some agreement with publishers. There are other solutions that putting your own "rules" in front of everyone else's. – Buffy Nov 20 '18 at 21:22
  • 1
    @Buffy: You're mistaking who "everybody" is. "Everybody" shared copies of files - academic and otherwise - in disregard of the presumption to forbid this. So, it is publishers's lobby efforts that you're trying to enforce rather than "everyone's rules". It didn't quite work for Queen Anne and it sure won't work for the greedy Elsevier & al today. The idea of restricting copies is obsolete. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 21:33
  • Also, I do think libraries and universities in general should participate in arrangements for funding book publication. But if a students' library has done so - then it doesn't matter (IMHO) whether the file you have came from this server or that server; and if it hasn't - then you need SciHub. Oh, and - many/most people who download papers from Sci-Hub don't have check-out privileges at university libraries. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 21:37
  • Please continue this discussion in chat. – aeismail Nov 21 '18 at 13:25
  • 2
    Since you still insist on equating digital piracy with theft, here, here and here is some relevant reading offering a more nuanced view of the question. And as I said, piracy can still be wrong without being identical to theft, so this inaccuracy does not invalidate everything you wrote. – Dan Romik Nov 21 '18 at 16:20
  • 2
    @DanRomik, I think my position is clear enough. So is yours. Give it a rest. – Buffy Nov 21 '18 at 16:25
  • 2
    @darijgrinberg: In no way, shape, or form, was this an an ethical question of the form "how can I do this better?" Read the question. It basically says "I'm illegally downloading books. If you were the professor/author, would you appreciate $10 sent to you directly?". And I don't think this question answers that, so perhaps your downvote is reasonable after all. – President James K. Polk Nov 22 '18 at 20:33
  • @Buffy : This is going to be a bit long series of comments on this answer, and was inspired by issues brought up last night when I commented regarding the “mandated physical exercises” recent thread, that led me to consider this question thread as well, which I’d also seen before and I found you had also posted a post upon it, and also saw you had made one here. I actually would have posted this as a separate answer to the ones here, but can’t, because this thread is now closed. I apologize for the other thread; I got riled a little, sorry, before it sunk in hard. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:48
  • What I would say is that you both make some important, valid points here but also your post comes across as exercising what I find to be other instances of the “extreme judgmentalism” that I saw you respond negatively to in the other dealing, and more it seems to me that you may not have fully appreciated the OP’s position here. I am not advocating you to accept a different ethical system or conclusion, but your post seems rather quite less sympathetic than the otherwise-sympathetic tone you have expressed elsewhere to people with a different view. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:48
  • For one, I most strongly challenge the idea that to “unilaterally break a social contract and substitute your own terms” is all that wrong to do - at the very least, to the extent there may be any fault with it, it’s less than that of personally making a promise to you of something of value and then reneging upon it. “Social contracts” are neither entered voluntarily nor are they easily escaped, rather they are, in effect, “socially blessed” herd mentality. Herd mentality with teeth, and you elsewhere slammed “herd” mentality. You could argue them perhaps necessary, (cont'd) – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:48
  • (cont'd) but still, this makes them much more susceptible, I’d think, to criticism, and what I think OP’s stance here is that when the usual methods for challenging those social contracts don’t work, that more direct action to rebel against them may be warranted. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:48
  • Of course you could say that the author also implicitly accepts the social contract and so then it does in effect kind of, sort of constitute a “renege on personal promises” type situation, but I’d say that also ignores the fact of hir own coercion into said “contract” just same which, again, tempers it. The issue is complicated and I’m not here to debate it at length, I’m just pointing it out. At the very least, I suspect OP shares this attitude and my point is to explain it for sympathizing purposes. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:49
  • Now, where I see you as exercising fleet in your judgment is this: “taking something that isn't yours and benefitting from it without compensating the producers (both authors and publishers) who have expended resources in its creation.” and then reaffirming toward the end with that “IP” “needs an incentive”. Yet he has said rather clearly, I’d think, in his post that the reason he would be giving $10 to the professor was because based on the sources that he used to analyze the situation, this would constitute the “compensation” of the author. (cont'd) – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:50
  • (cont'd) Hence, he actually does think those who produce value deserve compensation, but he’s taking issue with the system of that compensation. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:50
  • That said, I think your strongest point against his course of action is that he has neglected to take into account that there are other contributors of value to the book in the supply chain besides just the author, such as editors, illustrators, and proofreaders at the very least, without whom the book would be more like a pile of manuscript with no images, not as well organized, and with more significant grammatical and/or spelling errors, than the slick product that he almost surely appreciates. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:50
  • A final point may be made that one would also have to balance the negatives of rebellion like he is doing here against the negatives of supporting a system that itself may be ethically questionable which is what one will inevitably do by paying the market price for a copy of the book. You may see that the former outweigh the latter, but you should acknowledge that a case could be made for the opposite as well. As said, my argument here really is to sympathize with the OP and advocate for such than it is to advance the superiority of one or the other ethical position. – The_Sympathizer Aug 01 '19 at 04:51
34

After thinking about it a bit more, I wouldn’t do this. Here’s a few reasons:

  • The professor will have to waste their time trying to decide whether or not to accept your offer, and surely they have better things to do.

  • They may have to declare such sources of income if they become large enough, so you’re creating issues for them without offering much help.

  • You need to hide your identity otherwise it will be obvious you’ve breached anti-piracy laws.

  • The publisher may or may not have contributed considerably to the book (e.g. editing, advertising) and cutting them out of the picture goes “too far” in the direction of rewarding the content creator and denying rewards to the content distributor.

In short then, I wouldn’t do this.

However, also I disagree with Buffy’s answer. Ebooks are a non-rival good. Hence the ethics of “stealing” them is pretty complicated, and in my view there are situations where “stealing” a non-rival good is permissible or even obligatory. It’s inaccurate to call this “simple theft” in my opinion. In any event, whether you send them money or not, I wouldn’t feel too guilty about this¹.


¹ Roughly: If an ebook is on sale for $70 and it has $90 of value for you, buy it. If it has $50 of value for you, then obviously you’re not going to buy it. So you either get some value from this ebook (by “stealing” it) or you don’t (by not “stealing” it.) Therefore you should “steal” it, since society ends up $50 better off overall if and only if you “steal” it. And if, upon reading it you find that the total value to you has exceeded $70, then you should buy it.

Wrzlprmft
  • 61,194
  • 18
  • 189
  • 288
goblin GONE
  • 714
  • 4
  • 10
  • 1
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment. – Wrzlprmft Nov 20 '18 at 12:19
  • 1
    This answer holds true for all e-books. I would further add that textbooks in particular "spread out" their value to society in a way that other books (say, fiction) generally do not; ie, the information in the textbook is meant to be put to use in productive work for the benefit of the public. – user447648 Nov 23 '18 at 13:57
  • 1
    I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, I can give you only one vote :-( – Kushan Randima Nov 24 '18 at 23:44
  • 3
    "The professor will have to waste their time trying to decide whether or not to accept your offer" this can be bypassed by simply saying "I liked you book and sent you an additional $10". The author has no reason to not accept the gift; it's not offered in exchange it's given as a gift. – pbhj Nov 25 '18 at 22:30
  • @pbhj, that's actually a pretty good idea! – goblin GONE Nov 28 '18 at 08:03
26

If you are a professor who authored a book, how would you feel about this?

I'd feel extremely annoyed. You're not only doing something illegal, you're cheating someone of their work. This wouldn't be because of money - it's very unlikely I wrote the book to make money. It'd be about justice and fairness, concepts which are too core to my values to compromise for $10. Plus the fact that you pirated my book means someone with even less scruples than you could also have pirated it.

My likely reaction is to notify the publisher at once, and if it comes to a lawsuit, I'd testify against you.

Allure
  • 127,528
  • 50
  • 325
  • 493
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Wrzlprmft Nov 20 '18 at 18:57
  • 6
    This answer is not clear; could you explain please? The part that I find confusing is that you speak of cheating someone of their work, but immediately then insist not because of money, as it is very unlikely you wrote to make money. First, then why did you write the book? Second, then how were you cheated, if not because of money (where you feel cheated precisely because no money was given to the publisher). To recap, please explain: 1) Who is cheated and how? 2) If not for money, why did you write the book? 3) If you do not write for money, why don't you give the book online for free? – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 20:54
  • 4
    @Aaron the publisher is cheated of their work done. That, I think, answers the other questions as well. – Allure Nov 20 '18 at 21:33
  • @Allure It fully answers the part about being cheated, but it does not answer the part about "Why not just give the book data away for free then?" since you could do that instead. However, that part is not necessary to understand your answer and is merely left as a curiosity. Thank you. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 22:44
  • 3
    @Aaron there's another question about this - https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63951/if-an-author-does-not-intend-to-make-much-revenue-from-a-book-why-not-make-it-o. My perspective is, publishers do a nontrivial amount of work. If I engage their services, I can't give the book away for free anymore (unless I make it open access, in which case I need to pay the publisher a substantial amount of money). The alternative is to not engage the publisher in the first place, which significantly increases the effort required to publish the book (not to mention distribute it). – Allure Nov 20 '18 at 22:55
  • @Allure I meant more what you ended with, as in, not engaging with the publisher in the first place. I think that part of your comment implies that you consider any editing, illustrating, or any other duties they perform to be worth it, and indeed that may be the case. Possibly even distribution if you do not want to host an ebook yourself. Thank you again. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 23:10
  • 3
    @Allure my publisher allows me to give my book away freely online, which I do. I didn’t even have to ask for permission, it was included in the standard contract they offered me. Not all publishers are so enlightened of course, and I assume this has to do with the style and target audience of the book. But still: I think the premises underlying your comment need to be re-examined. Basically if you wrote a textbook and actually didn’t care about the money and wanted to give it away for free, it would not be at all hard to achieve without any ethical problems related to cheating the publisher. – Dan Romik Nov 21 '18 at 06:35
  • @DanRomik if the publisher allows you to give away your book online, how are they getting revenue from it? – Allure Nov 21 '18 at 08:06
  • 2
    @Allure Many people prefer a nicely bound copy of the book instead of either a purely electronic version or a bunch of loose sheets of paper. – Tobias Kildetoft Nov 21 '18 at 09:45
  • 1
    @Allure: Revenue is not the only aim of academic publishers like Cambridge University Press, which is the publisher of Dan's book. – Mark Meckes Nov 21 '18 at 15:02
  • 1
    @Allure they get revenue from sales of physical copies of the book. It is reasonably priced and people (and libraries) still buy it. In fact I suspect that for certain types of textbooks, having a free version available online may actually increase hard copy sales, but I don’t have data to back that up. Cambridge University Press might have such data though, and that might be another reason why they are okay with it. – Dan Romik Nov 21 '18 at 15:47
  • @DanRomik It's very surprising to me if this is standard procedure for CUP. Did they let you upload the final ebook or just a preprint? What was the acquisition process like? What exactly was in the contract? How many copies of the book did they sell? If you're interested in discussing these things let's do it in chat. – Allure Nov 21 '18 at 20:07
12

Undertake a sincere and useful civic action as penance for your (somewhat self-righteously defended) abuse. Collect all the students at your university. Sign a petition to your state representative (or equivalent for outside the US). State your case with proof rather than subjective statements such as "... it is well-known that". Demonstrate why you believe that publishers hold the equivalent of a virtual monopoly on textbooks, for example because they keep the costs to enter the textbook publishing business at a prohibitive level. Demonstrate where you find their business model has increased the expense of textbooks unfairly, for example because relatively higher portions of the costs for a textbook are going to pay salaries at upper administrative levels. State a case for how this is causing the cost of education to be well beyond the means of today's college students even with loans. Propose and demand appropriate legislative action to fix the problem.

Start a movement that will do something beyond raising a (rather disrespectful) attitude about the problem and then asking for moral support in a discussion forum for what amounts to a penny that will be given in disdain. In other words, as much as I emphasize with the pain any student faces with covering the costs of textbooks, my proposal absolutely will not make right the action of effectively stealing a textbook. If nothing else, it is only a far better penance than sending money to the author.

Jeffrey J Weimer
  • 4,501
  • 13
  • 28
  • 2
    I just read that textbooks account for about 1% of the cost of education. A Calculus book (e.g. Stewart) now costs about 10 times what mine did in the early 1960s. But so does everything else. Food, housing, transportation, etc. The kindle edition of Stewart is only about 5-6 times what my hardcover was back then. I remember spending about $100 for most of a year's books and was horrified. Now is is said to be about $900. BTW, I still have that book, so it was a good investment. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 14:22
  • 4
    While the relative cost may be low, it is still a substantial out of pocket expense. Loans and scholarships do not pay for the textbooks. As I stand now on the other side, I am pained to see students struggle to have to buy books that are, as you say, well beyond the costs that should be reasonable. I can buy a smart phone today at nearly the same cost as I paid for my first programmable TI calculator back then. Why can't I buy a textbook today for the same cost as back then? Is the paper today made of gold or platinum? – Jeffrey J Weimer Nov 18 '18 at 14:34
  • 4
    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law. There is no such law for paper. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 14:37
  • 2
    One civic act that might actually help is to work toward a system in which authors are compensated separately from book sales, say via tax revenues. This makes the creation of IP truly a social good and a shared responsibility. Books could then be distributed for free or sold for manufacturing cost, or whatever. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 14:52
  • 1
    Yes. Moore's law. But then, one might expect the same forces in play to decrease cost across all industries. Alternatively, we might agree that paper costs increase, but realize the material's costs in a book are but a fraction of the net costs anyway. I am not in favor of using tax revenues for social rebalancing here. I'd rather see action toward recognition of publishers as monopolies. I see it from the other side as well with the explosion of costs for journal subscriptions for our libraries. We digress. – Jeffrey J Weimer Nov 18 '18 at 15:33
  • 3
    Publishers don't have a legal monopoly. Anyone can attack their business model. Anyone can offer competition. If their profit margins are outrageous then someone has a lot of incentive to do it. But no one has yet been able to put all the pieces together (from acquisition to distribution) to make it any cheaper for buyers. Some models replace paid employees with volunteers and that works up to a point, but hasn't been shown to scale. Apple's profit margin is 22%. McGraw is 25% (one of the highest). Creating things is hard work from a lot of people. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 15:40
  • 1
    Note also that the price charged on successful books includes the amortized cost of creating, but not manufacturing, the ones that never sell. It is hard to predict a winner so publishers create a lot of failed books. If the price difference between ebooks and hardcovers is an indication, about half the cost is due to manufacturing. So publishers absorb those costs initially, but include it in price of books that sell. This is the "cost" of choice that we pay. One model is to charge back the development cost of a failed book to the author. A clear disincentive to write. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 15:47
  • @Buffy Interesting insights. They've expanded my understanding of the issue. Thank you. – Jeffrey J Weimer Nov 18 '18 at 20:47
  • 1
    At the moment, piracy is the competitive business model, though there also are some open source or creative commons textbooks, or attempts to create such. – Tommi Nov 19 '18 at 07:38
  • @JeffreyJWeimer I don't think it's reasonable to try to apply the idea of Moore's law to something outside of the sector it applies in. Even Moore's law isn't holding up well lately; but the context that it was involved a boom in computers and "the digital age". If anything, you could probably argue that it might increase the relative costs of paper products; because their use is less, and therefore there would be less economic demand. I'm sure that can probably be offset by better processes due to technology, but "Moore's law for paper" probably happened for the printing press era. – JMac Nov 20 '18 at 17:48
  • @JeffreyJWeimer wrote "Loans and scholarships do not pay for the textbooks." Is that something new? When I was in college, loans and scholarships were precisely what most students in my area used to cover their textbook costs. In fact, the college bookstore was usually a ghost town until the day those loans and scholarships were disbursed, and then suddenly the college book store was so crowded it was difficult to move. And the books were expensive, but less than the average loan/scholarship amount. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 21:01
10

TL;DR:
Ask your librarian how to obtain mandatory textbooks, articles etc. You will be surprised what they can actually do for you.


I doubt you are obliged to buy the book but rather bring the book with you to the course. Am I nitpicking? Probably yes.

There is a significant difference, tough. In the second, highly probable, case you can borrow the book in the university library for a whole semester, month, week, etc. for "free" and the books lended by the library were paid fairly through their budget. Usually, textbooks are published within the university publisher and the library usually keeps enough copies to supply the students. Do go ask your librarian whether they possess the textbook needed and borrow it.

When you are there, do yourself a favour and ask for online access to scientific journals and publisher houses outside your university. As a student you should have some access to such resources as well - your university is paying A LOT for such access. In the end you can find you didn't pirate at all. You should find that - the school shall provide you anything mandatory to the whole study - books, hardware, software, and tools.

I have also heard many times "You should buy this textbook..." but it was in lectures the teacher expects we, students, will use the book not just in one semester and/or we will write notes in there. Many times they were right, sometimes they weren't.


"free" means that you may be obliged to pay annual access to the library, you are paying for the course and the access is a part of the package provided. At least you or your parents pay taxes that contribute to the university budget and the library is an unsignificant part of it.

Actually, you have payed for the book the day you become a student and even notice that.

Crowley
  • 3,279
  • 10
  • 21
  • I don't think you're actually answering OP's question. – einpoklum Nov 21 '18 at 18:52
  • 1
    @einpoklum When a student borrows a book "for free" at university's libraray the payment for the book was done by the library and funded from government. OP does not need to pay anything extra, no harm is done and no moral dilemmas are created. – Crowley Nov 21 '18 at 19:04
  • This comment is the crux of your answer per-se... – einpoklum Nov 21 '18 at 20:06
  • @einpoklum I have embedded the comment in the answer not to rely on an implications: You can borrow it legally => payment was done => no crime committed => no dillemma. – Crowley Nov 21 '18 at 20:14
8

It sounds like you would be sending the money anonymously, presumably cash in the mail, and that raises another point: receiving anonymous mail can make people nervous.

My instinctual guess on receiving an anonymous envelope would be that it's going to be something unpleasant: a scam, or hate mail, or sexual harassment, or crazy ranting, or (in this day and age) maybe anthrax. "Money from a reader who pirated my book" is not going to make the top 10. There's a fair chance that I might destroy it without opening it.

At the very least, for many people, it'll cause them more than $10 worth of anxiety. If your goal is to do something nice for the author, this seems likely to achieve the opposite.

Nate Eldredge
  • 133,015
  • 44
  • 379
  • 480
  • I assume the envelope will come with a nice (anonymous) thank-you letter that explains what the money is for. – Federico Poloni Nov 26 '18 at 09:14
  • @FedericoPoloni: Sure. My point is that the anxiety comes before the envelope is opened. Putting a nice letter inside the envelope doesn't help with that. – Nate Eldredge Nov 26 '18 at 15:27
8

Absolutely don't do it!

I illegally download almost all the books I need for my studies.

Don't be so sure it's illegal. You didn't specify where in the world you live, nor where the books were published, but in some countries it's perfectly legal, and in some other countries it's a gray area, despite opinions to the contrary.

While I'm more than happy to give a middle-finger to the publisher mafia, it does of course mean that the author of the book is not appropriately compensated for their work.

You seem to be assuming there is some damage or loss to the author of someone making a copy of his/her book, for which s/he needs to be compensated. That is the subject of philosophical, political and at times legal debate.

But ... it is well-known that professors do not make substantial amounts of money for each copy sold of their textbook.

No, this is not well known at all; some academics lose money due to publishing books and/or get no money per copy sold. What is, however, generally the case is that Professors are employed full-time and need not worry about their material welfare due to more or less money coming in from book sales.

With that in mind, would it be appropriate to simply send those odd 10 dollars to the author of the book that I am illegally downloading?

So, this would probably not be necessary even from a moral/social/political perspective. But more importantly: It would be quite dangerous, since you would be waving a flag above your head calling to be investigated for copyright violation. Regardless of what such a turn of events will result in, it would mean hassle, stress, expenses and discomfort for you and your family, roommates, friends etc.

If you are a professor who authored a book, how would you feel about this?

I would feel sorry for having put a student of my work at risk of legal action, fine or jail time; and I would also feel sorry for having taken 10 dollars from a likely much less well-off person who probably needs the money more than I do.

... instead, do something else:

You know, "pay it forward":

  • If you know of a cause the author supports - consider donating to it.
  • If you're writing some academic material or software - consider making it freely-downloadable, officially.
  • If you're just an undergrad - perhaps do some kind of volunteer work, like helping high-school students who are having trouble keeping up, with some tutoring. Many universities, student unions and out-of-academic social structures have this kind of volunteer programs, I'm sure you can find one.

this would not be "penance" for your download. On the contrary, it would strengthen the same principle you applied in downloading the book in the first place, which is that knowledge, research, insight should be shared more freely, and that the more-established should help the less-established (e.g. in terms of knowledge).

einpoklum
  • 39,047
  • 6
  • 75
  • 192
  • 1
    "Don't be so sure it's illegal." Pretty confident that worldwide things are inclining towards downloading ebooks without paying being illegal, see e.g. https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86414/is-it-legal-to-use-sci-hub-in-germany?, which doesn't deal with this exact question but is quite close. – Allure Nov 19 '18 at 23:01
  • 3
    @Allure: Even the top answer to the question you linked to says "There does not seem to be one court case where one was prosecuted for just downloading such material.", and that some legal scholars (and zero court decision) consider it as "probably illegal (as opposed to: "illegal"). And that's in a country of your choice. – einpoklum Nov 19 '18 at 23:36
  • That answer is outdated, obviously. It was written in Mach 2017. See my answer, which quoted an April 2017 court case. – Allure Nov 19 '18 at 23:45
  • Also the ECJ rules for the entire EU, so it's more than just one country. – Allure Nov 19 '18 at 23:51
  • This is being carried on in the other question, but in brief if anyone's only reading this: the law rules on all copyrighted material, not just films; it also makes no distinction about whether the motivation for piracy is for profit or not. – Allure Nov 20 '18 at 00:07
  • What? It clearly establishes limits "up to 15%" and "up to 75%", which makes downloading the book illegal. I don't understand what you're saying anymore. I'm just going to ask this on Law.SE and leave it at that. – Allure Nov 20 '18 at 00:30
  • 2
    I link you the Law.SE question and leave it at that. https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/33639/is-it-illegal-to-pirate-an-e-book-in-the-eu "Section 60c permits copying only up to 75% of a work for personal research, with some exceptions for smaller works that presumably do not apply to monographs, so it would not permit the download you describe if the download would otherwise be forbidden." I don't have anything more to say to you - I consider the case that it is illegal well established, and you're just grasping at straws. – Allure Nov 20 '18 at 21:42
  • 1
    @Allure: I've removed my comments now that you've linked to the Law.SE question. I think you've phrased it in a loaded way though. Also, your conclusion from the discussion in that question is faulty. That is, the answers there do not establish that downloading a book from SciHub is illegal in Germany; at most, they suggest it is possibly illegal, or likely illegal. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 22:47
  • 1
    @Allure That does sound like more of a problem for the person providing the copies than it is for someone receiving such a copy, and my instinct would be that the downloader would not be at fault but only the uploader, as has often been the case in law (uploaders have been prosecuted before and had heavy penalties). But I do not know enough about the EU nor that specific case you guys are discussing, so I cannot insist on this and only suggest that the law.SE people have made a minor mistake in confusing downloading with uploading. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 22:47
  • 1
    @Allure Ok, I just read into that a bit more as quickly as I could. Again, it appears that people are suggesting that downloading the files is illegal but then are failing to make the connection as to how or why that text is interpreted that way. They seem to be making the assumption that downloading the file is making a copy, and I think that is not so legally. Logically it's not the case; logically the download is the same as saying "please make a copy and give it to me," and that is different than actually making a copy. Whether asking for a copy is illegal in EU... dunno. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 23:00
  • @Aaron: This is getting very far from my answer, which did not regard Germany at all. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 23:10
  • Sorry. If the "take to chat" link pops up for anyone, hit it. In the meantime, I've taken it to that law.SE answer. Sorry if I sound harsh Allure; not trying to be. It might well be possible that the download is illegal in the EU now, but that text by itself does not necessarily imply so, despite the answer provided at law.SE (so I've commented there). Hopefully you get a better answer there from someone willing to go into all these nuances. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 23:13
6

It is not appropriate.

Apart from anything else you are putting the Professor in a difficult position. They have a contract with their publisher to distribute the books for a share of the proceeds, in bypassing this arrangement you are effectively making the professor complicit and potentially putting them in breech of contract.

It is also worth mentioning at this point that academic and technical books are expensive to buy because they ere expensive to publish, requiring a lot of specialist editorial oversight and usually fairly sophisticated formatting and tend to sell in relatively small volumes. If the author wanted to put the text up on a website or otherwise self-publish for a lower price they had the option to do so.

Equally ignoring known breeches of copyright can be seen as tacit permission so you may be harming their copyright claim by admitting to piracy and effectively putting them in a position of either condoning piracy of their own work or reporting you neither or which they will particularly want to do.

You could argue that these are trivial concerns and accepting £10 dollars isn't going to cause them any real harm but you are also questioning their integrity by offering them what could well be considered a bribe to ignore copyright infringement, something which tends to be taken very seriously in academic circles.

There are also potential ethical and professional concerns for professors receiving money from students for legally dubious activities.

So quite apart form the legal moral issues associated with the original piracy giving the author money under the counter is then forcing them to make an ethical judgement and probably causing them much more hassle than it is worth.

They would also be very foolish to accept as you are putting them in a position where you could cause them serious harm by revealing the transaction. For example if you told the university authorities that a professor had been taking money to ignore copyright infringement it would at the very least be very embarrassing for them, probably a lot more so than it would be for you. I'm not suggesting that you intend to do anything of the kind but it creates a situation where you could.

Equally while academics may be prepared to turn a blind eye to suspected pirating textbooks by students, offering them money more or less forces them to take a position on the subject.

Chris Johns
  • 1,249
  • 8
  • 6
6

As the author of a book that has sold quite well, but is no doubt also pirated a fair bit, I would say that receiving a small sum like this in the post would create an ethical dilemma far exceeding the actual value.

(a) should I declare it to the taxman?

(b) should I declare it to my publisher? After all, I now know that you have stolen $50 from them and they might want to take action.

(c) should I inform the police? After all, I have become aware of a crime.

Quite apart from that, converting $10 into my local currency isn't worth the hassle or the bank commission.

Incidentally, don't underestimate the contribution of the publisher to the total value of a technical book. They have delivered a far more useful product than I could have achieved on my own, both in terms of the textual content but also in terms of the value added by effective presentation.

Michael Kay
  • 1,591
  • 11
  • 12
  • If you use Paypal, you can receive as little as $1 in pretty much any currency and still get at least a half of the sum on your account after the commission. (a), (b) and (c) would still apply though. – Dmitry Grigoryev Nov 23 '18 at 09:18
5

Understand that you are not negotiating a price with the author, you are giving them an arbitrary amount of money which doesn't entitle you to legally use the books you've downloaded. What you do is essentially a gift and I suggest you label and treat it as such. Giving a gift makes it clear there's no obligations for the receiver for accepting it (like granting you a license to use the pirated book) which they wouldn't be able to fulfill. Small gifts also have no impact on taxes (AFAIK in US gifts are only taxed when they exceed $15K/year), so there's no good reason to refuse them. Especially if you tell the author that you'd like to thank them from the great book they have written, without specifying how you obtained the book.

If you phrase your money transfer as "Here's $10 for your book which I got from a site so-and-so", then strictly speaking, the author will not be able to accept your money. You clearly sound like you're paying for a service (granting you the rights to use the book), which the author will most probably not be able to provide because that would be forbidden by their contract with the publisher. The only reasonable thing the author can do is to refuse your payment.

Dmitry Grigoryev
  • 5,440
  • 13
  • 36
  • Saying something is a gift isn't enough to make it a gift. If I stopped paying my gardener or cleaner but made occasional gifts instead, the taxman wouldn't be sympathetic. – Michael Kay Nov 22 '18 at 18:35
  • 1
    If you mow your lawn yourself, you absolutely can gift money to your gardener without any worries. What the OP does is exactly a gift: they don't expect the other party to do anything for the money they're sending. – Dmitry Grigoryev Nov 23 '18 at 08:39
  • It is clearly a payment in recognition of the work done by the recipient, rather like a tip given to a hairdresser as thanks for a job well done. If it were common practice for professors to earn significant income this way, I'm sure the taxman would treat it as income. – Michael Kay Nov 23 '18 at 08:54
  • 2
    @MichaelKay Actually, a tip to the hairdresser is much more likely to be subject to tax than money sent to a professor in recognition of their book. As long as the hairdresser does your hair, you have a business relationship with them. This is not the case of a professor who wrote a book you like, unless the said professor also tutors you or sells you their books directly. – Dmitry Grigoryev Nov 23 '18 at 09:07
  • You clearly don't' understand even the basic premise of the situation if you think they stole the book. They're not denying anyone access, it's not stealing. And that's not just pedantry (essential in question of morality, ethics, and law) but also a very important element of the analysis. Copyright is not a natural right but is a right granted by the demos, a right which has been wildly perverted from it's original form; but is nonetheless the key element in the analysis from the legal side. You might as well have answered a question about a cake by saying "don't make it with PVA". – pbhj Nov 25 '18 at 22:38
  • @pbhj Point taken, though I can assure you I understand the situation pretty well. – Dmitry Grigoryev Nov 26 '18 at 07:49
4

You got a textbook illegally, without paying, but you are thinking about giving some money to the author. That puts you ahead of many people.

The implementation is not too good. If you send $10 to the author, that is income to the author, which needs to be declared if the author wants to stay legal himself.

I would recommend that you figure out how much the book was worth to you, and donate that amount of money to a charity.

gnasher729
  • 3,554
  • 14
  • 16
  • 2
    Sorry, that is just a "feel good" act that doesn't address the problem in any way. Of course it is good to donate to charity in any case, but not just to make yourself feel better for a wrong you did. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 14:48
  • 4
    @Buffy: Nirvana fallacy. Illegally copying books and then donating money to a charity is not as good as paying for the books, but better than illegally copying books and not donating money to a charity. – gnasher729 Nov 18 '18 at 18:14
  • 5
    Hmmm. So, I take an IPad from the Apple store without paying. Then donating half its value to my favorite charity makes it ok? Or taking a 50 cent candy bar from my corner store and then dropping a quarter into the Sunday collection plate. Fine? Is there a fallacy of "pretend ethical behavior", I wonder? FWIW, I think my Toyota was greatly overpriced and the dealer has some policies I don't like. Hmmm. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 18:59
  • 8
    @Buffy gnasher didn’t say it “makes it okay”, just that it’s better than OP’s proposed action. Sounds correct to me, and closer to being an answer to OP’s actual question than what you wrote (which is also mostly correct). And to answer your question, donating half the value of the stolen iPad to charity doesn’t make it okay, but it’s preferable to just stealing an iPad. How does this rhetorical question advance the discussion exactly? Everything you’ve written here only addresses the question “is it okay to illegally download books?” rather than OP’s actual (and different) question. – Dan Romik Nov 18 '18 at 23:36
  • 7
    @DanRomik, no, you are not correct. Everything I've written here is that it is unethical to unilaterally break a social contract, substituting your own terms, taking something that isn't yours and benefitting from it without compensating the producers (both authors and publishers) who have expended resources in its creation. It is an insult to creators. I haven't discussed legality. Others here seem to be trying, like the OP, to find a way to make it sort of ok, when there is an obvious, clean, and simple solution. Purchase a legal copy. Other "solutions" are just self delusion. – Buffy Nov 18 '18 at 23:52
  • @Buffy thanks, that last comment clarifies your position a lot. – Dan Romik Nov 19 '18 at 00:05
  • @Buffy It may improve your answer to edit in some form of your last comment to Dan. – Mr.Mindor Nov 19 '18 at 15:14
  • 1
    @Mr.Mindor, thanks. I guess I need to do something like that. – Buffy Nov 19 '18 at 15:21
  • It was worth a handshake, a hug and heart-felt gratitude. – einpoklum Nov 20 '18 at 19:23
  • 1
    @Buffy I have seen several instances of this "violating a social contract" thing come up (at least one of them probably from your answer), but there is a problem with that: OP has no such contract with the publisher or with the author. OP has violated no contract. I am not suggesting that makes it ethically ok (at best it's just rude, at worst it is insulting and rude and not compensating others for their work as you say), but it is doubtful that any contract has been broken. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 21:09
  • @Aaron, I was speaking of the implied social contract that we treat one another openly and fairly. Not a formal signed contract. – Buffy Nov 20 '18 at 21:19
  • 2
    @Buffy I have heard people speak of such before, but I think it is an error to call it a contract. Whether tangible, metaphorical, or otherwise, to call it a contract implies a deal was struck. I have no deal with anyone and refuse to acknowledge any such deal or agreement. I'm not a jerk because I'm not a jerk, and I do what is good because it is good, not because of any social obligation I have to anyone since I have no such social obligation. It might seem like a nit, but I think the distinction is important as contract implies a lot. I'm under no contract of any sort, implied or otherwise. – Aaron Nov 20 '18 at 22:34
  • @Aaron. Then neither is anyone else. Wild West Rules. – Buffy Nov 20 '18 at 22:45
  • @gnasher729 Good suggestion. The OP wants to measure the harm they morally consider to have produced, and compensate it. If the moral concern is "authors may not earn enough money to make a living and write more such books", the appropriate charity would be one which helps authors with insufficient means. Alternatively, a charity like the Internet Archive or a local library, which promotes reading and therefore the expansion of the market for authors. – Nemo Sep 24 '19 at 20:33
2

If someone illegally took your intellectual property and decided for themselves how much they should pay for it, and on what terms, would you be happy with that? I suspect not, in which case you probably shouldn't do it to other people. The golden rule ("do unto others") is a good basic start for academic ethical issues, and it applies to the publisher as much as to the professor.

Edited to add. If I were the author, I would not want to be sent money for my book, other than via the publisher to whom I have presumably already transferred the copyright in return for payment, as accepting it would be a violation of the "golden rule".

Dikran Marsupial
  • 5,538
  • 20
  • 27
  • You cannot "take" someone's "intellectual property". https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html – Nemo Sep 24 '19 at 20:29
  • @nemo there is no such think as "proof by Stallman". That is one persons opinion, not a fact. – Dikran Marsupial Sep 25 '19 at 11:28
  • Then you might want to improve your answer by using a less charged language. – Nemo Oct 01 '19 at 13:46
  • @Nemo there is nothing "charged" about the language used in my answer (I could have used "stole" rather than "took"). Stallman might think you can't take someones IP, but that doesn't make it true. Ask musican who's work has been plagiarised. – Dikran Marsupial Oct 01 '19 at 14:39
1

As many people have already mentioned, you want to absolve your guilt of pirating a thing by sending a meager amount of money (that you can afford) to its creator.

I would say, don't do it. Don't send money to the creator.

The legal/ethical concerns have been addressed in other answers/comments. I download pirated books too. They are very costly and I can't afford them as yet. So, if I like a book & it really helps me in my project/work, I leave a detailed review of the book on Google, Amazon et al. I also mention it to my friends in my social circle.

Basically, I take up the role of an advertiser for the book/author. My review/recommendation can attract more people to this book & some of them, more ethically inclined then me, will choose to buy this book from the publisher.

Piracy is a very complicated topic. One way I try to uncomplicate it is by advertising it (the thing that I pirate) to more people & leaving detailed review & rating on the internet. There are no legal/ethical hassles to you or the creator with this approach.

KharoBangdo
  • 182
  • 6
  • Yeas and no. It comes to the typical "for exposure" argument. No: Of course you can give them exposure, but if this only means more pirated copies, this is no adequate payment. Yes: OP seems to have pirated the book and does not want to pay the full price, so a review is better than nothing at all. but he should not feel like he paid it back by leaving the review. – allo Nov 21 '18 at 09:26
0

There is a financial aspect you should also consider: these professors will receive unexpected money they need to somehow

  • declare or not
  • explain the provenance of, if someone (tax office, financial fraud groups, etc.) asks them

Both cases are probably over the top for 10 USD (and you will likely be only one to send them the money) but can be stressful to them.

Send the money to a charity instead.

WoJ
  • 8,330
  • 18
  • 42
  • 1
    By this logic one should never tip in a restaurant. The poor servant will have so much trouble handling this unexpected money. – Dmitry Grigoryev Nov 23 '18 at 08:44
  • @DmitryGrigoryev: tip money is cash (at least where I leave). A wire transfer is completely traceable. But of course, as I mentioned, 10 USD is not worth the worry - I added the answer for completeness. (the condescending tone of your comment is not useful) – WoJ Nov 24 '18 at 08:18
-1

I think a reasonable answer would be to create an anonymous email account and ask those authors this question. That said, I wouldn't worry about any full (tenured) professors' going hungry, nor would I worry about the publishers, who have an obscene profit motive with hugely inflated costs (and a very wasteful business model). There is a reason why there is huge consolidation in publishing: it is a capital intensive, highly profitable business. If you've got money burning a hole in your pocket and a desire to make a contribution, then find some way of puting that money toward the book purchases of someone less able to afford them.

jeffmcneill
  • 123
  • 3
  • 15
    The only answer the author can give without getting themselves on legal trouble is to tell you to abide to the law and legally purchase a copy of the book. Otherwise, they would be advising you to break the law stole from their partner (the publisher). In fact, jeffmcneill's reasonable answer seems a great scheme to fish for material to blackmail authors. – Pere Nov 18 '18 at 14:53
  • 1
    This is in fact wrong. There are many responses to the question which do not "advise" anyone to break a law. The fact someone is claiming they have done something illegal in no way requires that a person simply has to parrot back the simplistic formulation of "legally purchase a copy of the book". Examples: Donate to charity, buy a book for another student, etc. Obviously an author in a contract with a publisher is constrained on how they can distribute their works, but that does not mean they have their ability to speak freely stripped from them. – jeffmcneill Nov 21 '18 at 03:30
  • 1
    If the profit margins were truly unreasonable, then there would be a good business model for a new publisher to under-cut the competition by publishing text books at a significantly lower price. So either the free market is failing on this one, or the margins are not that unreasonable. – Dikran Marsupial Nov 22 '18 at 12:14
  • 1
    @DikranMarsupial your either/or statement seems correct, but it’s worth pointing out that, first, the free market often fails to be efficient (among other reasons, because it is less “free” than we imagine), and second, established academic publishers enjoy all sorts of advantages over less established ones that could well allow them to maintain much higher profit margins and make it difficult for the new publishers to undercut them. For example, authors might prefer to publish with very well-known publishers because of the high credibility and prestige that comes with doing that. – Dan Romik Nov 22 '18 at 13:56
  • "free markets" are definitely not free and there are many, many confounding factors that go into academic textbook pricing. For one, the person who selects the textbook (professor/lecturer) is not the end-buyer (student or parent), so there is very low price sensitivity. In terms of the industry, book publishing is highly profitable, capital-intensive, and a "hit-driven" business, which means the more titles and back-list, the greater profitability. This drives industry consolidation which means less choice. There are many other factors as well. – jeffmcneill Nov 22 '18 at 15:24
  • @Dan Romik these days it isn't difficult to publish teckbooks via e.g. Lulu or LIghtningsource. I suspect the reason they don't is lack of sales due to lack of advertising/promotion. But that is one of the things commercial publishers provide. If a publisher has high prestige, that is what part of what we are paying for. Having said which I have been working on a programming textbook for my students for years, which I intended to release free as an e-book and on paper at essentially cost as I know students have a limited budget. – Dikran Marsupial Nov 23 '18 at 14:35