On Thursday, some links to the notorious shadow library Library Genesis (Libgen) couldn’t be reached after a US district court judge, Colleen McMahon, ordered what TorrentFreak called “one of the broadest anti-piracy injunctions” ever issued by a US court.
In her order, McMahon sided with textbook publishers who accused Libgen of willful copyright infringement after Libgen completely ignored their complaint.
To compensate rightsholders, McMahon ordered Libgen to pay $30 million, but because nobody knows who runs the shadow library, it seems unlikely that publishers will be paid any time soon, if ever.
I would ask if you’re fine with books becoming subscription based commodities.
I would hope your answer is no.
We both know you don’t read past the headlines though, so your opinion on this matter is as limited as your understanding of the topic.
I agree, creators should be paid, but libraries should be a protected branch of society. one day when capitalism forces a subscription pattern to books and locks knowledge behind paywalls, those libraries will be the only salvation for the disenfranchised masses.
Only if it is like $20 a month and encompasses all of your textbooks, but that will never happen
I don’t think you grasped the danger in a subscription based publishing model.
you don’t get to read the book unless you pay the monthly fee. you stop paying, you stop reading.
you don’t lend the book, you don’t borrow the book, you don’t copy the book…because there is no book.
so how do the disenfranchised or poor gain access to knowledge outside their means? today, there are libraries. what happens if all those physical books are replaced with digital? worse yet, what happens when publishers con libraries with digital media? (you can’t fool the librarians, but any dumbass politician will eat a shit pie for optics).
point is, there is permanence in physical media that makes ownership crystal clear. our society is not ready for a digital era, and if we prematurely enter it without appropriate laws and guidance in place, we will only be encouraging a plutocracy to form, one of which we can already clearly see forming today.
Except literally nobody keeps their old textbooks they are by nature disposable, and not printing them is a massive win for the environment.
you used literally incorrectly. I kept my books from college. they sit on my shelves with all the books I’ve collected. why? because peer reviewed reference material is becoming increasingly more difficult to find on the Internet. it may be out of date in some cases, but it does give you a path to find exactly what you’re looking for.
so what if you get rid of your textbooks? that’s the whole point. what happens to your textbook after you have discarded it?
someone else picks it up.
I can hear the whine now, “what if I throw it in the trash?” maybe don’t? maybe donate the book to your local library and they can give it to someone who needs it. maybe leave it on a bench on campus with a “free” post-it stuck on it? but even if you throw it in the trash, your garbage goes overseas where someone else might pick it up. the potential reuse of a physical book and the impact to our world is far greater than any environmental impacts. it’s not toxic waste, it’s a fucking book.
your argument that you’re “saving the environment” is just preposterous. it has the same energy as the fools who think using paper straws over plastic is making any dent in environmental impacts. news flash, it makes negligible difference in plastic pollution while the oil and plastic companies continue to do more harm to the environment than any subset of humanity ever has based entirely on their manufacturing processes alone.
the only true crime are the publishers that print books without bindings. but those really can’t be called books then, can they? don’t like it? stage a protest, since you seem so passionate about saving the environment.