Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

Yes, let's congratulate people for stealing. I'n some perverted way I know what you are saying and taking it as a compliment. but it's not. Unethical people are just trying to make money off your hard work. What gives them the right?

A.W. wrote: "Leehla wrote: "Does it bother you when we download books off the internet?

...So a lot of people who download books from peer-to-peer sharing websites/forums couldn't buy ebooks even if they wante..."
But how do we know that piracy takes away legitimate sales? We have no way of knowing whether people would have bought the book if they couldn't have downloaded it off the internet, unless there's a survey and they answer the survey honestly. Sales of "romance" novels have declined because a lot of them have very little actual romance in them - often only on the last one or two pages. That's why I won't buy a book unless I can read it first. I'm so tired of being so disappointed - thinking I was reading a love story but the guy's a jerk for most of the book (and the woman lets him get away with it). That's fine for people who like those kinds of books but don't label them "romance". I'll get off my soapbox now. 😄

The people who own pirate sites may not be poor but we don't know whether their members are poor or not.

I've traveled overseas and I couldn't download any electronic content; ebooks, evideos, etc. - even free ebooks from Amazon and the iTunes app - because I was outside the U.S. Content that can be downloaded overseas often is a foreign version and parts of movies/books are changed.

If I buy a hard cover/paperback book and loan it to a friend (who wouldn't have bought the title on her own anyway), do you still consider it stealing? (I think of the internet as a "library" and as with my library, if I read a book and I like it, I'll purchase a copy. But if I can't read it first, I probably won't buy it. I'll read something else.)

I know the term "piracy" is used when talking about this issue but is that an accurate term to use when justification/explanation is possible? The bottom line is; authors aren't losing any money (at least) from me because if I can't read a book first, I won't buy it. If anything, authors are making more money from me since the birth of the Internet, because I've been able to read books I wouldn't have normally bought. If I liked them, I bought a copy.

Effie wrote: "Why would you buy a book after you already read it? Most readers wouldn't. I don't buy bootleg movies or steal music. Artists and producers pays millions to produce and market. It's simply wrong an..."
The only books I (and other people I've spoken to) read and buy are romance novels and we buy ones that we feel are written like love stories (instead of books written where the "hero" of the story is abusive to the heroine throughout most of the book and is only loving towards her at the very end of the novel). We buy romance novels where the characters are loving towards each other because it's a pleasure for us to read these love stories and we want to patronize/support the author - showing our gratitude to (usually) her - and hoping she can make a living from writing and can do it full time.

I don't buy bootleg movies or steal music, either. But if we check out a movie from the library or listen to a song/album on YouTube, that's not stealing - even though the studio or artist isn't making money. Libraries don't have the rights to books either but they offer it for free.

What I'm trying to do is comfort authors by getting them to understand (at least in our case), that if you see your book on a website that offers it for free, you may not be losing money/sales because it's there. It's possible people wouldn't have bought the book if (for example) the internet didn't exist.

Nupur wrote: Honestly, if people care enough about your work to try and pirate it, you're doing something right. You should congratulate yourself and move on."
It's hard to do that if you feel you're losing money/not making a profit. But if authors can think of this situation as not losing money, then maybe they won't feel bad if they find out their books are on these filesharing websites.

Effie wrote: "Yes, let's congratulate people for stealing. I'n some perverted way I know what you are saying and taking it as a compliment. but it's not. Unethical people are just trying to make money off your hard work. What gives them the right? "
But is it stealing? Is it stealing when we check out a book from the library? When people sell books in a second-hand book store, are they unethical? They do make money off your hard work (and I'm pretty sure they don't send "royalties" to the authors). File-sharing websites offer books for free. The only profit they make (as far as I know) is from ads and they use that money to pay for server costs.

There is so much theft, dishonesty, and bad behavior in the world because so many go out of their way to condone or justify such activities.

One should never attempt to equate stealing with borrowing or bad behavior with naivety. There are various degrees of bad behavior; however, wrong is wrong! Trying to find ways to justify wrong doing is wrong.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble. It's what we know that ain't so."
Will Rogers (Humorist) 1879 - 1935

You can’t compare taking a book out of a library to a pirate website. The library bought the book for patrons to borrow. I’ve donated plenty of books to libraries. My choice. I didn’t choose for a website to put my book up for free.

Leehla,

It took me three years to write my first book. Is it too much to ask a reader to pay 3.99 for an e-book for hours of reading. Or wait for a .99c sale and get a bargain? Do you really need to get it for free illegally?

I don’t always give a full description right away. I like to integrate it into an observer’s thoughts or describe a feature during an action. All physicality of a character doesn’t have to be spit out at once like a modeling resume. For the minor characters I don’t always go into as much detail.

As a reader, for major characters, at some point, not too late in the book, I'd like at least a little description. It doesn't have to be too detailed but it's nice not to have made up my own "look" for the person and then find out towards the end of the book, that they look nothing like I imagined. At that point, I would rather not have a description of the character.

Minor characters don't need much detail at all, unless it's important to the story.

Leehla wrote: "But is it stealing?"

YES

What part of illegally taking an author's copyrighted material and distributing it without the creator's consent do you not understand?

Pirates steal content and in the case of ebooks, often buy from Amazon, download the file and then return for a refund so the author is hit twice. What you are doing is no different to shoplifting - you are stealing a product you do not have a right to.

Libraries either buy books or have them donated, to then make available to patrons. It is done with the copyright holder's consent and often there is compensation if the book is purchased first.

Leehla wrote: "I have a question for all the lovely writers out there:

Does it bother you when we download books off the internet?

I know some authors feel they're losing money when people do this but I think ..."

This absolutely bothers me as an author. I've invested hours of my time to create a work which I offer for sale. If I offer it free as a promotion then anyone is welcome to it. However, if someone steals my work and offers it for free then that is stealing.

I love to get new readers but as the owner of my work, it is only up to me or my publisher to decide on the pricing.

Leehla, its stealing, pure and simple.

You don't even bother reviewing the books you steal, which would at least be some small thank you to the authors for their hard work.

Leehla wrote: "But is it stealing?"

YES, Leehla, it is (and I can't believe we're actually having to explain that book piracy is stealing).

Is it stealing when we check out a book from the library?"

Nope. But guess what? That's a completely different thing. THAT is done with the knowledge and consent of those that own the rights to the book. It's legal.

Libraries don't steal copies of books then lend them to people without permission of those that own the rights to the books.

"When people sell books in a second-hand book store, are they unethical?"

Nope. Again, a completely different thing. They've purchased A copy and are reselling, used, that one copy. They own that one specific copy. What they are not doing is purchasing a copy, making bootleg copies of it, and selling (or giving away) as many copies as there are takers. THAT would be illegal.

You want to know one reason the costs of books are so high? Look in the mirror. Because those of us who are honest, ethical, and obtain our books through legal means have to pay the costs of those like you who do not.

Yes, it's stealing, and it's not only unethical, it's illegal. And you're not only hurting authors and publishers, you're hurting other readers as well as libraries.

=> A. W. wrote "What part of illegally taking an author's copyrighted material and distributing it without the creator's consent do you not understand?" <=

And the same goes for stealing cable, music, and movies, which people seem to think is okay. It's not!

To the writers out there; when writing do you go into a dreamscape to write so it comes out of your unconscious? I am watching this creative writing series by Robert Olen Butler and he says that is what you should do as an artist. I like watching the series, but some parts are really like watching grass grow. The parts he does the explaining are very interesting.

Jim wrote: "There is so much theft, dishonesty, and bad behavior in the world because so many go out of their way to condone or justify such activities.
One should never attempt to equate stealing with borrowing or bad behavior with naivety. There are various degrees of bad behavior; however, wrong is wrong! Trying to find ways to justify wrong doing is wrong."
But is it theft to download something you wouldn't have bought in the first place? In other words, the author isn't losing out on a profit if I download a book. But if I have the ability to read it (and then buy it if I like it), isn't - in fact - the author making a profit (ultimately) by us having the ability to download off the internet, because I'm able to have access to the book for free in the first place?
And is it theft/dishonesty/bad behavior to check out a book from the library? The author's not making a profit each time someone checks out a book, either.

You see, I'm just trying to understand the concept of what's being done and trying to get someone to get me to see how it's something that hurts the author. Yes, of course, if we download a book for free that we would have bought if we couldn't have downloaded it - then the author is missing out on making a profit (but that doesn't apply to me and others I've spoken with).
Along the same line, if a person checks out a book from the library that they would have bought if libraries didn't exist (in which case, the author is also losing out on making a profit), does that mean we shouldn't have libraries?

If you can justify something, is it wrong? And the act of trying to justify something isn't, itself, wrong. That's normal behavior. It's a way of trying to understand. If something is wrong, you won't be able to justify it.

You can say I'm naive but there's nothing wrong with not understanding where someone is coming from and wanting/trying to understand. And if they can't offer a justification for their way of thinking/explaining, then maybe what I'm doing (downloading a book from the internet) isn't wrong.

If you can explain to me how downloading a book from the internet is bad, I won't do it. And if it's bad, why isn't downloading an ebook from the library bad? It's not considered stealing or pirating when we check out a book from the library. The only differences I can see are;
- when we download a book from the internet, we have the flexibility of reading it at our leisure (rather than having to read it within - for example - 14 days
and
- we have the flexibility of reading it on the device of our choice (computers, etc.) rather than being restricted to only reading it on certain devices (kindles, etc.)

The bottom line is the author. And the author isn't affected (that I can see) by whether we download a book from a file-sharing website or from a library website.

Effie wrote: "You can’t compare taking a book out of a library to a pirate website."
Why can't we?

Effie wrote: "The library bought the book for patrons to borrow."
And a member of the "pirate"/file-sharing website bought the book for the website's members/patrons to download. Someone had to purchase the ebook in the first place.
For example; if one library buys an ebook for its patrons and ten people check it out, how is that different from a member of a file-sharing website buying the same ebook, and having ten people download it (from the author's perspective)?
If anything, these file-sharing websites help to take the financial burden off of libraries (because they're basically functioning as libraries). So libraries can use their budgets for other things, such as; new computers, furniture, wages for library staff, etc.

Effie wrote: "I’ve donated plenty of books to libraries."
Are they books you wrote? If so, doing so means you're potentially losing out on a profit, and you're ok with that (and I think it's wonderful that you do donate).
If they're not books you wrote, how do you know whether the author(s) are ok with you doing that? Yet, we do that all the time (donate books to libraries we no longer want/need).


Effie wrote: " My choice. I didn’t choose for a website to put my book up for free."
But what difference does it make to you whether a file-sharing or a library website puts the book up for free?
The end result is still the same. If anything, you're making more of a profit by having a file-sharing website put your book up (because someone had to buy it first). If you donate your book to a library, no-one bought it first.

Leehla, Leehla,

How can I explain this? And to be honest, I'm not sure what is not clear. You ask if it's stealing if you wouldn't have bought it in the first place. First off, that's insulting to the author. Basically you are saying that their years of work, creativity and talent are not worth paying for. Not to mention the fact that the author spent money to have their book edited, formatted and designed.

So if I go into a dress store and see a dress I THINK I MIGHT want to wear but I'm not sure, should I TAKE it? Try it out and if it looks good on me and I decide I like it, then go back and pay for it? Please don't say it's not the same, BECAUSE IT IS!

Let me explain so you will understand how this works. I write a book. Have it copyrighted. That means that NO ONE can publish my book without my permission. NO part of it. I either am lucky enough to get a publisher and put it in their hands to control or I keep COMPLETE control and self publish. I happen to use KDP (kindle publishing) And I also decide that I'm going to be exclusive with kindle so that I can be in kindle select. That means that I can run promotions through kindle and more importantly, subscribers of kindle unlimited can read my book. Not for free because they pay a monthly subscription to read as many books as they want. And I GET PAID for the pages read through kindle unlimited.

No one, not me or kindle, has given permission to anyone to take my e-book files and upload them to their own site and offer my book for free. This is illegal on the site administrators part. It's against the rights of my copyright. It's MINE! I am the only one who can give permission for this. It's nervy, it's unethical, it's criminal.

Why do you need to go to these illegal sites when so many authors run promotions and give their books away for free on their own? Go to bookbub or any of the other legit sites that authors use to promote free and .99cent books.

You say it isn't hurting us, but it is. If enough of these sites steal my book and readers find it, why would anyone ever pay for it? Do you like to earn a living? Or recoup the money you put into a project? Don't we have that right? If you had any idea how much money I've spent on editing, publishing and marketing you'd be shocked.

I hope this clears things up for you, Leehla.

1. most indie books are not in libraries - so that point is 100% invalid.
2. Authors get paid MORE to have an book in a library. They often have number of download contacts for ebooks. So again, your library point is invalid.
3. many of these pirate sides have subscriptions. So.... you are paying a thief for stealing. Nice. And where is that money going? Remember these are thieves. They are not nice people. Like most counterfeiters, pirates etc they fund people traffickers, drug dealers, oppressive regimes etc.
3. Reading ILLEGAL pirated books is like jumping on a bus having a perfectly nice ride and not paying because you didn't like the scenery, or the final destination. Saying- 'well the bus was going there anyway so its not costing the bus company anything' still means you are a fare dodger. The bus still needs to be maintained (author has to pay their bills). If everyone dodges the fares - No more bus. No more books.

And if you can afford the devices to read on - you can afford to buy the books you like to read or join Amazon KU. And you can read kindle books on ANY device. There's an app.

And a member of the "pirate"/file-sharing website bought the book for the website's members/patrons to download. Someone had to purchase the ebook in the first place.

You really think they buy them? They don't. If they can decrypt the 'do not share' software installed on EVERY book amazon sells, why would they bother to buy a book? They are thieves, they don'y pay for stuff, its their thing.

EVERY time one of my books starts popping up on pirate sites, I see a 'return' on that book on Amazon a day or so before.

Leehla wrote:
Are they books you wrote? If so, doing so means you're potentially losing out on a profit, and you're ok with that (and I think it's wonderful that you do donate).

It's my choice. It's my book. I wrote it. I can do what I want with it. No one else can. Did you ever watch a movie and see the disclaimer that says this cannot be copied or distributed...
They say that because it is copyrighted material. You can buy a CD of music or a movie, but you have no right to make copies and sell it. The same is true for e-books. You can buy an e-book but you are NOT ALLOWED to share the files and put it up on sites NOT APPROVED by the owner of the copyrighted material.

I'm not sure what you don't understand? Is it because you don't view the e-book as a tangible item? What if you wrote a killer term paper and I thought it was so great that I decided to steal it off your personal site and sell it to college students? Is that okay? It's not hurting you, right?

Emma,

I never thought about the returns being because of that. Fortunately, I've had very few returns. I've chalked it up to it not being the readers thing. After all, you can't please everyone. But now you've put a bug in my head. From now on, each time it happens, I'll have to check around the web to make sure my books haven't popped up on these CRIMINAL sites.

Emory wrote: "A question for readers and authors

Does every character in a book need to come with a description of physical appearance so you, the reader, can form a visual of each character the story comes ac..."

If you read the classic five Prydain books by Lloyd Alexander, with no forewarning, you are unlikely to notice that, at no point does he ever describe the physical appearance of Taran, the primary character and protagonist in all five, even though they are written in third person.

Despite my not realizing this for forty years, I just always assumed I knew almost exactly what he looked like. Our minds tend to fill in blank spots, given half a chance.

Effie wrote: "I don't consider kindle unlimited readers reading for free because they do pay for the subscription and we get paid per page read."

Oh, as an author I absolutely consider a Kindle read as a sale because I make almost exactly the same amount of money if they read the whole thing. As a reader, I tend to think of Kindle Unlimited reads as free because that monthly subscription fee is automatic and, therefore, normally below my level of perception.

But that's why I said I wanted two million readers just like him, not four million, although four million would be great, too.

I also make as much and sometimes more from kindle unlimited reads. That’s why I’ve begun to try to target market those readers.

Trish wrote: "The pirate websites wouldn't exist if there were no people like Leehla using them. Please stop. "
Filesharing "pirate" websites existed first, then people started using them. And you don't know whether I "use" them (aka download books from them) or just visit. As it turns out, I haven't downloaded books because I kept hearing conflicting opinions as to whether they were ethical or not.
What I'm trying to do is get justification/an explanation from those (often authors) who feel it's wrong to download from file-sharing sites but so far, no one has given me justification/explanation as to why it's wrong.

Trish wrote: "These books have not been paid for and it is illegal."
Books checked out of a library haven't been paid for either but that's acceptable behavior. Whether something is illegal or legal isn't always necessarily dependent upon whether something is wrong or right.

Trish wrote: "Stop trying to justify it to the people you are stealing from."
I'm trying to explain/trying to get authors to see it from "the other side" of the argument/discussion so they don't have to feel bad if people do download their books. In other words, they may not necessarily be losing money/not making a profit if people download their books from file-sharing websites. The way our society is set up, we already have the capability to read books for free (aka the library) and it's not considered piracy or stealing. I also think of the internet as the library. If you feel downloading a book from the internet is stealing, why don't you consider checking a book out of the library as stealing?
Before the internet, if someone didn't want to purchase a book before reading it (for whatever reason), they would check it out of the library, borrow it from a friend, etc. Now I know it says in the beginning of many ebooks that they are non-transferable, but even websites such as Amazon will let us loan out the books, we buy, to others. So the author isn't making any more of a profit if one person buys a book and loans it out to ten friends than if the same person buys a book and uploads it to a file-sharing website and ten people download it.

I am at a total loss. I don't know how much clearer I could have made the distinction.

You are wrong. The library is not the same. Libraries BUY books. Or if the author chooses to, they donate them. I donate books when I do an author event at a library.

If every library in the country decided to buy my book, I would be thrilled! That's a lot of books being PURCHASED. hat's a lot of readers being exposed to my work.

Sharing books at the library is acceptable behavior is acceptable because that is the agreement. The library obtains the book through LEGAL means and shares them through the permission of the publisher and/or author.

I'm not sure how many of us and how many times we have to stress to you that these file sharing sites are ILLEGAL. They are run by people who Stole an author's property. If you don't understand that, I'm seriously worried.

Effie wrote: "It took me three years to write my first book. Is it too much to ask a reader to pay 3.99 for an e-book for hours of reading. Or wait for a .99c sale and get a bargain? Do you really need to get it for free illegally?"
You're still not giving me an explanation as to why it's wrong to do what we used to do (and still do) when checking out a book from the library.

It's not so much about the price of the book (at least not for me). I've gladly payed $15.00 - $20.00 for hardcover romance novels that I thought were written like a love story. I've downloaded free ebooks from author's websites that I wouldn't have payed two cents for (after I read it).

I've written a book, also. (It's a non-fiction title and I've uploaded it to Smashwords because I wrote it to inform, not to make a profit.) So I have some idea of what you mean when you imply that you worked hard in creating your (hopefully) literary masterpiece. :)

I need to get most novels for free (initially) because I've been reading "romance" novels for ten years, now, and I only have a handful of books I felt were worth any amount of money. I want to patronize/support authors that I feel have written romance novels that have a lot of romance/love in them - not novels where the "hero" is mean, nasty, abusive, etc. to the heroine throughout most of the book. (That's just my personal preference but I want to spend my hard-earned money supporting authors who write novels that I feel are well-written and read like love stories, not "war" stories.)
And because I've been so disappointed, so often, when reading a book that I thought was a romance/love story (only to be disappointed, even to the point of going postal :-)) because the "hero" was abusive to the heroine and she took his abuse, didn't stand up for herself, and even rewarded his behavior by having free sex with him - as it says in the book: "Are Women the Stronger Sex" by Josette Sona), I won't buy romance novels until I read them first.
I've spoken to a lot of women over the years and they feel the same way.

And just because something is legal or illegal, it doesn't necessarily mean it's ethically right or wrong.

Jumpj1952 wrote: "To the writers out there; when writing do you go into a dreamscape to write so it comes out of your unconscious? I am watching this creative writing series by Robert Olen Butler and he says that is..."

I get into a "zone" sometimes and the scenes just play themselves out in my mind. The words flow and it's awesome. I'm not sure if this is the dreamscape you're referring to, but that's what happens to me sometimes.

A.W. wrote: "Leehla wrote: "But is it stealing?"
YES
What part of illegally taking an author's copyrighted material and distributing it without the creator's consent do you not understand?
Pirates steal content and in the case of ebooks, often buy from Amazon, download the file and then return for a refund so the author is hit twice. What you are doing is no different to shoplifting - you are stealing a product you do not have a right to.
Libraries either buy books or have them donated, to then make available to patrons. It is done with the copyright holder's consent and often there is compensation if the book is purchased first. "
If you consider downloading a book on the internet stealing/pirating, why don't you consider checking a book out from the library stealing/pirating? (Please see my previous comments regarding legality.)

The uploader of a book (on these file-sharing websites) isn't "distributing" an author's copyrighted material but rather, having it available for anyone - who is a member - to download it just like
a library doesn't "distribute" an author's copyrighted material but rather, has it available for anyone - who is a patron - to take it off the shelf.

When I started buying books from Amazon, the rules were that we couldn't return any electronic materials (ebooks, evideos, etc.) unless they were defective. If a customer returns an ebook, the author isn't "hit twice". A customer can only return it if there's something wrong with the file (in which case the customer wouldn't be able to upload it and no one would be able to download it).
And Amazon would try to replace the corrupted file so the customer would still be purchasing a copy, just like a librarian purchases a copy when adding it to his/her library collection. Online stores won't give refunds for ebooks just like a store won't accept the return of a hardcover/paperback book after a customer has bought it (unless it's obvious that there was something wrong in the printing of the book, for example; blank pages, etc.)

The definition of a pirate is a person who attacks and robs ships at sea. One of the verb definitions of "pirate" is to use another's work for profit without permission. Those who upload ebooks to file-sharing websites don't make a profit in doing so. (Please see my previous comment on the file-sharing websites themselves.)
Libraries "use another's work" by loaning it out to patrons and librarians don't ask the author's/copyright holder's consent/permission before doing so.

I've worked in various libraries for years. The creator/author doesn't give his/her consent to every library that owns a copy of his/her book. Now I know each library has to purchase a copy for their collection (which includes the library's branches in a given area) but a lot of the file-sharing websites/forums I've visited will ban its member if he/she purchases a book, uploads it, then uploads it again to another forum. www. dpgroup.org is an example of this.
(In other words, it is possible that each file-sharing website contains a copy of a book that was purchased by each uploader. Whereas, it is possible that only one library has purchased a book and loans it out through Interlibrary Loan to libraries in other towns, cities, even states.)

We never gave "compensation" to an author if we purchased their book (nor when the author donated his/her book - in which case they often would put a book plate inside the book saying something like: "Donated by author").

Please don't accuse me of shoplifting/stealing! You don't know whether I've downloaded any books from file-sharing websites or not! I know it's illegal to download from file-sharing/peer-to-peer websites (which is one of the reasons I don't download from these websites)

What I wanted to know, from the author's point of view, is why authors don't want people downloading their book from the internet but they're ok (if they're ok) with people checking it out of a library.

I feel I'm just repeating myself (responding to some of the comments on this thread) so I'll step aside and let others continue the discussion on both sides. :) If I have time, I'll visit this thread again.

Leehla wrote: "Effie wrote: "It took me three years to write my first book. Is it too much to ask a reader to pay 3.99 for an e-book for hours of reading. Or wait for a .99c sale and get a bargain? Do you really ..."

I've kept quiet up until now, thinking others would be able to make the distinction for you. The core of your argument is that it does not hurt authors. Yes, illegal downloaded copies can and Does hurt authors, especially those who write a series and is published with traditional big and small publishers.

Publishers and stores such as Barnes & Noble look at sales ranks in determining whether or not to keep an author themselves or subsequent works in a series. If they don't see certain numbers by designated checkpoint dates, the author's livelihood is in jeopardy. Publishers will cut the amount of print copies they will allow based on e-book sales numbers, among other things.

Ever find a series you liked and wondered why it stopped abruptly or never finished? Your e-file "sharing" sites are probably to blame.

You seem to believe all people who visit those sites will download a free copy and then turn around and buy a copy later. Most people will not buy something they can get for free. Sadly, that's the nature of people.

One author actually put this to the test after her publisher cut back on her print run and was threatening to cancel other books. You can read about her experience here: http://maggie-stiefvater.tumblr.com/p...

Leehla wrote: "The uploader of a book (on these file-sharing websites) isn't "distributing" an author's copyrighted material but rather, having it available for anyone - who is a member - to download it just like a library doesn't "distribute" an author's copyrighted material but rather, has it available for anyone - who is a patron - to take it off the shelf.."

I can't decide if you are trolling us or if you are so morally deficient that you truly don't understand the concept of theft, since you keep insisting that pirating material is "just like a library."

You gloss over issues of consent and permission. Libraries either buy books (which is a commercial contract giving them permission to make it available to their patrons) or the books are directly donated by authors (again a contract giving permission).

Using your analogy if I walk into a jewellery store and walk out with a diamond bracelet without paying, that's not theft. I wasn't going to buy it anyway and I just want to wear it around for a month or two to see if I like it. Since consent and permission mean nothing to you, by your standard its totally ok for the guys at a party to do whatever they want to the drunk girl.

You spend a lot of time arguing semantics, such as pirate sites aren't "distributing" back "making available" the illegal content. You can call it what you want, it's still illegal circulating copyrighted material. The pirates are thieves twice over, they never pay for the books but either buy and immediately return for a refund or some join author's ARC teams and break NDAs and social contracts to upload ARC copies to pirate sites.

Piracy is illegally taking copyrighted material (books, music, movies) and distributing it without the creator's consent. It is illegal. It is theft. It is a crime. That is why the FBI investigated Kim Dot Com, who owned the largest peer-to-peer lending sites, ie: PIRATE sites in the world. He fled to New Zealand to try and escape the repercussions of his crime but the US issued an extradition order and he has been remanded back to the US to face a court trial and potentially prison time (if found guilty).

And YES piracy hurts authors. It reduces sales and in some cases has very real repercussions for authors when books fail to meet sales targets and are dropped by publishers. I had a series pulled due to low sales and I still get PIRATES emailing me and complaining that they can't find book 2 on these sites for free download. Maybe if those people had bought the first book, there might have actually been a sequel for them to read as well. Instead that series was deemed uneconomic and there won't be any more instalments.

Leehla, do you honestly believe these words that you've written?
"What I'm trying to do is comfort authors by getting them to understand (at least in our case), that if you see your book on a website that offers it for free, you may not be losing money/sales because it's there."

Bloody right I'm losing money! I find it hard to believe that you'll buy a book after reading it for free, but only if you like it. If you read a book for free, and decide you like it, will you pay the 2.99 that the author asks for the sequel, with only a preview to read before buying? Further, I find it imposible believe that there are many folks out there who will pay full price for a book they can download for free.

So how do you tell these authors that you're doing them a favour, how do you believe that you're being comforting? Do you not realize that these people toil for hours, weeks and in some cases years for what amounts to (usually) a financial pittance? Do you not think their craft is worth the asking price of these books? How am I, or any other hard-working author for that matter, supposed to look their kids in the eyes and explain that there will be less of a Christmas this year because there are a bunch of people who wanted to steal my work instead of pay for it? You may sit there and shake your head, that your actions don't make that much of a difference, but THEY DO.

Artists, musicians, craftspeople, writers...we all live under difficult enough circumstances, unless our last names are King, Rowling or Cussler. Do NOT steal our work and then ask us to be grateful
It's theft, plain and simple.

Leehla wrote: "I have a question for all the lovely writers out there:

Does it bother you when we download books off the internet?

I know some authors feel they're losing money when people do this but I think ..."

I have to speak up on this discussion of piracy sites vs. libraries. Let’s make something clear: libraries do not get to lend books infinite times. When they buy a hardback, it might make it through several dozen readers before wearing out (library bound books probably can do a few hundred). So even the hard copies have to be bought repeatedly.

As for the ebooks we borrow from the library: the big publishers sell the right to a limited number of borrows. When that number of loans is reached, they have to pay again. Some Indy authors—I’m one—have chosen to make our ebooks available to libraries for a single purchase with unlimited loans. I did that because a) most libraries won’t purchase Indy books, and if one does want mine, I want to encourage it, and b) because I support libraries to the hilt. But I respect the right of the author next to me to say they want to follow the traditional model and charge per 10 loans or whatever.

And here’s the thing: the library will respect that too. They will pay for the book up front (I think it’s been made pretty clear that pirate sites usually or often don’t), and they will pay again when needed, or stop lending the book. Nor are the patrons allowed to keep the books, or pass them on to others. Three weeks and return it, please.

Here’s the other thing: libraries aren’t free. What, you didn’t know? They don’t magically appear. They are paid for by our taxes, and so I have, in fact, paid something for the right to use the books there.

When we put a copyright in our work, it is a signal to you and the rest of the world that any site besides a library or a bookseller that is offering it to you for free (still worse if you are paying someone with no right to sell our work) has stolen it.

Honestly? The argument that we might not be being hurt by those thefts is immaterial. The author has made his/her feelings about copyright violations clear by putting copyright on the book in the first place. Any non-legit source is theft. And, again, so that I don’t have to hear that argument again: the library is a legitimate source that has paid for the right to lend the book.

Jumpj1952 wrote: "To the writers out there; when writing do you go into a dreamscape to write so it comes out of your unconscious? I am watching this creative writing series by Robert Olen Butler a..."

I don’t think I’d call it anything so mystical as a dreamscape. But when the writing is really going, I am certainly in my happy place :)

Leehla wrote: "But is it theft to download something you wouldn't have bought in the first place?"

YES!! I don't know how to explain it more clearly. These sites do not have the rights - legally - to distribute these books. And those who download copies from them are stealing. It doesn't matter if you wouldn't have bought it anyway. Doesn't matter if you immediately delete it. It doesn't matter if you never bother to actually read it. IT IS STEALING.

"And is it theft/dishonesty/bad behavior to check out a book from the library? "

Ok, now you're just demonstrating that you're either too lazy to actually read the answers you've already received to that very "question", or your reading comprehension is seriously impaired.

NO, it's not theft/dishonesty/bad behavior to check out a book from a library. I have already explained how that is a completely different thing, so has A. W., and probably others. Bottom line - libraries obtain the legal rights and permissions to do so from those who own the copyrights.

If you can't see the difference there then you are an idiot.

"You see, I'm just trying to understand the concept of what's being done and trying to get someone to get me to see how it's something that hurts the author."

You're not trying very hard, because many of us have already explained to you how it not only hurts authors, but also other readers, and even libraries.

"If you can justify something, is it wrong?"

You haven't justified it at all, although you're trying very hard to excuse it. And yes, stealing books is wrong. Downloading pirated copies is wrong. Not only is it wrong, it's ILLEGAL.

"And the act of trying to justify something isn't, itself, wrong."

Of course it is, when you're attempting to justify something that is wrong, unethical, dishonest and illegal, which is what you're dong.

"That's normal behavior."

Normal for YOU probably. Typical of selfish, unethical people and criminals, yup. Normal for ethical, honest people, nope.

"If you can explain to me how downloading a book from the internet is bad, I won't do it."

We already have, and you don't care, you're still gonna do it. So, you're a liar as well. Which, given your ethics doesn't surprise me one little bit.

The main message I want to convey to the authors is; maybe please don't feel bad if you see your books on file-sharing websites. It may not necessarily mean you're missing out on making money because people are downloading your book. You might not have sold those books if (for example) the internet didn't exist or if someone hadn't uploaded your books to these websites.
(One of the reasons for declining book sales may be due to the fact that a lot of people spend their free time reading online articles, blogs, social media posts, etc. Not necessarily because people can now download a book for free.) Both started simultaneously, with the existence of the internet. And I don't know about you but I've read some posts on Facebook that are more hilarious than anything I've ever read in a humorous book - fiction or non-fiction!

I know that when a book is downloaded without the author's permission, it is (copied and is therefore) a violation of the copyright law. But the end result is still the same as if it was checked out of a library: the author isn't making a profit when someone has the book but didn't purchase it. One of the reasons why, I think, copyright laws were put on the books in the first place {pardon the pun :-)) } is to prevent others from plagiarizing an author's work and making a profit from it (and not giving at least a percentage of the profits back to the author).
When someone copies an ebook, it's not costing the author or the publisher money - for example; there are no printing and distributing costs, etc.
When we check a book out of a library, the author isn't making a profit from it, either.

Which leads me to second-hand book stores: why aren't they illegal? I'm pretty sure some (if not most, if not all) second-hand book stores don't give a percentage of the profits they make back to the author. Why aren't they considered "pirates" and their businesses "piracy"? So even if a member of a file-sharing website had to purchase a book before downloading it, either way, the bottom line is; the author probably wouldn't get a percentage of the profits.

What is the difference, monetarily speaking, to an author or publisher if;
a librarian purchases a book for his/her patrons and those patrons read it for free or whether
a member of a file-sharing website purchases a book for the website's members and those members read it for free? It just comes down to a matter of convenience for the reader, (being more convenient to download it from the internet).
For example, there were times (when I worked in a library) when I wanted to read the latest novel from an author that I didn't know whether I liked his way of writing or not. (I don't buy novels under those conditions because I've been disappointed, too often, from reading novels I thought would be good and I found I didn't like them.) But I didn't checkout the book because I wanted the patrons to have the opportunity to read it first and I figured I'd read it after the "hype" went down. But between a patron never returning it or someone accidentally damaging it; leaving it in the rain, spilling coffee on it, etc. (and it had to be discarded), I never got to read it. Now, if I had had the ability (and permission) to copy the book (file) and had done so, I would have been able to read it - and if I had liked it, I would have bought a copy. So by my not being able to copy a book, the author potentially missed out on making a profit. So maybe it's not the worst thing for an author when someone has the ability to copy their books.

I contacted a friend, overseas, and she tried purchasing ebooks from U.S. online bookstores and couldn't because;
she doesn't have a U.S. credit card,
nor a U.S. bank account
(and she can't open one online),
she has an overseas computer/laptop/device (and can only register a U.S. terminal with the bookstores),
and she has a foreign IP address.
So when these file-sharing websites are located overseas, possibly only non-U.S. residents can view them. And as their members (who download the books) can't purchase ebooks from the U.S. anyway, maybe the authors of those books aren't missing out on any sales. And as I've mentioned before, overseas versions of U.S. books are often different; different covers, different spelling, etc. And who knows what else is changed that we don't know about. Some people don't want to read versions of books that are different from the original. (And I'm pretty sure the Department of Justice can block overseas websites from U.S. IP addresses as well as websites that originate from the U.S.) So again, the authors aren't necessarily missing out on making a profit.

I'm saying all this to try and comfort authors because I appreciate the hard work that goes into writing a book and I appreciate the entertainment they provide when I enjoy what they wrote.

(I'll try to respond to others' comments, on this thread, when I have more time.) :)

Just a few thoughts I had that I wanted to share, and then I'll start working up the pages :-)) and respond to some of the comments posted, if I haven't already done so in my previous replies. After that, I won't be visiting this thread anymore (as I will no longer have the time to do so) but thank you to those who shared your feelings on the subject:
I understand that some authors don't like the fact that they're not asked permission before having their books appear on file-sharing/peer-to-peer websites but I worked in libraries for years and we didn't ask the authors or publishers permission when someone donated a book to the library and we added it to our collection.
Once we write and publish a book and put it "out there", we ultimately have to let it go (to a certain extent). Authors and publishers are rarely consulted after a consumer purchases a book. We can't control what people are going to do with it. Some people throw books away in the trash or use them to prop up furniture, or put them in the basement where they get moldy, etc. Others loan the copy they bought, buy books as gifts, donate them or leave them on bus benches, etc.

I haven't been successfully convinced that it is potentially any different, monetarily speaking, to upload a book to a file-sharing website and have someone download it than it is to give a book as a gift and/or re-gift it, loaning a book to a friend, checking it out of a library, etc. (I just keep "hearing" people say; theft, stealing, piracy, wrong, bad, etc.) The end result is the same; we're reading a book we haven't payed for. I know it's illegal. I know it's a violation of copyright laws. But maybe think of someone downloading a book from the internet in the same way (as the examples I just mentioned). Because I don't think people are going to stop illegally downloading off the internet. So I'm just trying to get authors to maybe see the situation from a different angle in the hopes that they won't feel so bad - that they're not necessarily losing money and/or not making a profit. (Unless, of course, an author doesn't like libraries, book gift giving, etc. In that case, I'm sorry...)
But please don't treat me like I'm the bad guy and give me attitude and sarcasm. I haven't downloaded any books that weren't given by the author for free. That's why I started this conversation in the first place. If I didn't care about how authors feel, I wouldn't spend my time posting on this thread.

Alexandra wrote: It doesn't matter if you wouldn't have bought it anyway.
It does as far as whether the author is making a profit or losing money.
I'm approaching downloading books from the internet from the standpoint of whether the author loses money or not when people do this. I know it's illegal. I know it's breaking copyright laws.

Alexandra wrote: ...libraries obtain the legal rights and permissions to do so from those who own the copyrights.
I've worked in different libraries and we never wrote to those who own the copyrights of books, asking permission to add them to our collection after purchase. If it's implied (when purchasing a book), then why aren't authors ok with an ebook being purchased and adding it to a file-sharing website's collection - monetarily speaking? I know it says (in a lot of ebooks), that they can't be "transferred", but Amazon lets us loan ebooks we've purchased to other Amazon members. And as far as I know, authors are ok with that. But what's the difference (again, monetarily speaking) if:
I buy an ebook and loan it to ten of my friends through Amazon or whether
I buy an ebook and upload it to a file-sharing website and ten people download it or whether
I buy an ebook (as a librarian) for the library's collection and ten patrons check it out?
The author isn't making any more of a profit either way.

And what if I buy a book and give it as a gift? As far as I know, authors are ok with that. Is permission already implied? If so, then what if, later on, I ask my friend if I can borrow it? Is that considered "stealing"? A lot of people purchase books and then share them with others, either as gifts, loaning them to others, donating them, etc. The bottom line is, the author doesn't make a profit after the initial purchase. So if authors can think of members of file-sharing websites who purchase ebooks and upload them (thus sharing them with other members) in the same way, maybe authors won't think they're losing out on making a profit when they find their books on these websites.

Because I think that's the main reason authors don't like it when people download their books off the internet - it's because they think of it as stealing aka they feel they're losing money. If I walk into a bookstore, take a book off the display table, put it under my jacket (for example), and walk out of the store, I'm stealing it. The author is losing money because he/she had to have it printed, distributed, etc. If someone buys and uploads an ebook on the internet and someone downloads it, it doesn't cost the author printing costs, distributing costs, etc.

Alexandra wrote: ...You're not trying very hard...
If you can't see the difference there then you are an idiot.
...you don't care, you're still gonna do it. So, you're a liar as well. Which, given your ethics doesn't surprise me one little bit.
If I didn't care, I wouldn't spend my time discussing this topic with authors, I'd be downloading books off the internet and I wouldn't care what authors thought! How many people do you know who take the time to ask authors what they think?
You don't know whether I'm "gonna do it" or not so until you know the facts, I strongly suggest you don't speak as if you do - unless you want to run the risk of having others think of you as an idiot.
My ethics are fine because I don't lie and I don't download books illegally off the internet.
Taking what I say out of context and having your kind of attitude is just a reflection on you.

Rebecca wrote: "...libraries do not get to lend books infinite times. When they buy a hardback, it might make it through several dozen readers before wearing out (library bound books probably can do a few hundred). So even the hard copies have to be bought repeatedly."
So it's better for readers to have books available from these file-sharing websites. The books are always available; they never go out of print, they're not damaged by other patrons/members, you don't have to wait to read the book because someone else has checked it out, the collection isn't limited to the librarian's budget but only by the amount of members who buy and upload the books, etc.
Libraries, because of their limited budget, usually don't buy a title more than once. If a patron hears about an author/title that was popular a few years ago, he/she may not be able to find it at their local library. But if they go to one of these file-sharing websites and finds the title/author, downloads the book, reads it and likes it and buys it, the author may make more of a profit because his/her book was found on the internet. If readers only have their local library for resources, and they can't find a particular author/title, they may just checkout something else (and never know how good the author is and never buy the author's works). So potentially, it may be in an author's best interest to have their works available on the internet.

Rebecca wrote: "As for the ebooks we borrow from the library: the big publishers sell the right to a limited number of borrows. When that number of loans is reached, they have to pay again. Some Indy authors—I’m one—have chosen to make our ebooks available to libraries for a single purchase with unlimited loans. I did that because a) most libraries won’t purchase Indy books, and if one does want mine, I want to encourage it, and b) because I support libraries to the hilt. But I respect the right of the author next to me to say they want to follow the traditional model and charge per 10 loans or whatever. "
What I mentioned applies to ebooks as well. When someone uploads an ebook to the internet, someone had to buy it initially. So again, what's the difference if a library buys an ebook with unlimited loans or a file-sharing site member buys an ebook with unlimited downloads - financially speaking? People may be more inclined to download the ebook off the internet because it's more "user friendly"; they don't have to return it within a certain amount of time, if someone else has checked out the ebook from the library, we have to wait until it's returned before we can check it out and read it - that's if it's even still a part of the collection, etc.
Why does an author support something that can potentially be costing them a profit? How do we know how many patrons would have bought a book if libraries didn't exist? Because I think that's what a lot of authors don't like about these file-sharing/peer-to-peer websites; a lot of authors see their book on these websites and think that they're missing out on making a profit (which may not necessarily be true).

Rebecca wrote: "And here’s the thing: the library will respect that too. They will pay for the book up front (I think it’s been made pretty clear that pirate sites usually or often don’t), and they will pay again when needed, or stop lending the book. Nor are the patrons allowed to keep the books, or pass them on to others. Three weeks and return it, please."
The pirate sites don't necessarily pay for the books upfront but the members do. Someone has to initially buy them. And if a website has a lot of members, more books may end up being bought by these sites than a library (with a limited budget) buys. A library may loan a book to another library through interlibrary loan but if a member from a file-sharing website uploads the same book he/she uploaded (to another website), they often get banned from the first website. When we take into consideration all of the file-sharing websites out there, that can mean a lot of revenue for authors. Potentially, one library in the country can buy one book and loan it to all the other libraries (unless the author is very well known and popular).
What difference does it make to authors (again, financially speaking - and I think that's the bottom line) whether the reader can keep the book or not or whether a patron passes the book onto others or returns it and another patron checks it out? It's the same, monetarily speaking, as far as the author is concerned. They're not making any more of a profit, either way. It's just more convenient for the reader to download a book from the internet as opposed to checking the same book out of a library (if the book is even available from a library). Keeping the book means they can read it at their leisure, as opposed to having to read it within a certain period of time. If they like the book, they'll (hopefully) buy a copy to support/patronize the author.

Rebecca wrote: "Here’s the other thing: libraries aren’t free. What, you didn’t know? They don’t magically appear. They are paid for by our taxes, and so I have, in fact, paid something for the right to use the books there. "
Libraries don't magically appear? No kidding! rofl :-)) But seriously, the internet isn't free either. We pay a monthly fee to our Internet Service Provider for the right to use the internet, along with buying a laptop/computer, etc.

Rebecca wrote: "When we put a copyright in our work, it is a signal to you and the rest of the world that any site besides a library or a bookseller that is offering it to you for free (still worse if you are paying someone with no right to sell our work) has stolen it. "
I understand that it's against copyright laws to copy a book - no one is disputing that. I'm approaching this discussion from the angle of whether or not an author is necessarily losing money by having his/her book appear on a file-sharing website. (And, I believe, copyright laws were put in place so people couldn't copy an author's work and put their name on it, or take parts of a book and put it in their own book and make money off of it and get credit for someone else's hard work.)
When a loved one (who isn't a bookseller) buys a book and gives it to me as a gift, or someone (again, who isn't a bookseller) buys a book and loans it to me, am I or are they stealing it? The author hasn't given them permission to give the book as a gift or to loan it. The author hasn't given me permission to accept the book and keep it forever (if I want to). If permission is implied, then it's also implied if someone buys a book and gives it as a "gift" to the fellow members of the file-sharing site they upload it to.
What difference does it make to the author (monetarily speaking) whether a family member/friend gives me a book or whether a member of a file-sharing website gives me a book?

Rebecca wrote: "Honestly? The argument that we might not be being hurt by those thefts is immaterial. The author has made his/her feelings about copyright violations clear by putting copyright on the book in the first place. Any non-legit source is theft. And, again, so that I don’t have to hear that argument again: the library is a legitimate source that has paid for the right to lend the book. "
It definitely matters as I believe (as I said before) that is what a lot of authors don't like about these file-sharing websites; a lot of authors feel they're missing out on making a profit because they believe people are downloading their books instead of buying them. Now, that may be true (in some circumstances) but those people would probably just check the same title out of a library (and still not pay for it) if the internet or file-sharing websites didn't exist.
Also, authors make a profit whenever a member buys a book and uploads it to these sites. There are a lot of file-sharing/peer-to-peer websites with a lot of members in each site and a lot of sites insist that the members (who download books) upload at least one book per week. That's a lot of books that have to be bought. If these sites didn't exist, would those same people buy those books just for themselves or would they possibly just check them out of a library? Don't be surprised if one day, (if these file-sharing websites don't exist anymore), that authors find they're not making as much of a profit as they are now.

We all know that copying a book is in violation of copyright laws and it's illegal. Copyright laws protect the rights of the author (so others can't make a profit from the author's hard work). I'm talking about how an author might feel bad (possibly due to his/her feeling they're losing money/not making a profit) when a book is copied/downloaded off the internet.

Any "non-legit source" is not necessarily theft/stealing. If I buy a book and give it as a gift, am I considered a "legit source"? If the person doesn't like the book and re-gifts it, is he/she considered a "legit source"? If I buy a book, have I paid for the right to give the book away or loan it to a friend? If I give a book as a gift, I don't ask the author's/publisher's permission if it's ok to give the book as a gift, just like when someone buys a book and uploads it to a website and makes it available (aka gives it as a "gift") to the other members of the site, they don't ask permission of the author/publisher. It's not theft if I buy a book and give it as a gift

If someone buys a book and uploads it to the internet, they're not stealing it from the author/publisher. They paid for it. If someone downloads the book, they're not stealing it from the person who uploaded it - they're duplicating it. The uploader still has the book.

Leehla, It's useless to argue with you. You have a twisted sense of morals.

Leehla wrote: "If someone buys a book and uploads it to the internet, they're not stealing it from the author/publisher. They paid for it."

Yes is IS stealing. Just because you keep saying it, doesn't make it true. Let me repeat that again because you have trouble grasping it - IT IS THEFT.

Also HUGE assumption in your statement, as most pirates don't buy books, they acquire them illegally in the first place, but that's a whole other conversation.

Have you ever bothered to read a copyright notice in a ebook that you are illegally stealing? When you buy a book it lets you read it and that is it. It is illegal to copy, upload or distribute in any fashion.

Here is a sample copyright statement (that you obviously ignore) and the content applies to most/all ebooks:
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” at the address below.

Since you seem to have difficulty grasping what copyright means, let me break that down for you. Unless you have the express consent and knowledge of the author:
* It is illegal to copy an ebook.
* It is illegal to upload an ebook.
* It is illegal to distribute an ebook.

You can keep arguing semantics but you are a thief, plain and simple.

Leehla wrote: "If I didn't care, I wouldn't spend my time discussing this topic with authors, I'd be downloading books off the internet and I wouldn't care what authors thought! "

You're not "discussing" the topic, you're here continuously trying to justify theft and continuing to claim it isn't theft. All while refusing to listen to those who have repeatedly explained to you that it is theft, and why.

In addition it's been explained to you how this theft hurts everyone, not just authors.

It's OBVIOUS you do not care, and that you intend to go right on stealing.

It's not for nothing your profile is completely blank and brand new. Clearly you know what you are doing is not only wrong, it's illegal.

Alexandra wrote: In addition it's been explained to you how this theft hurts everyone, not just authors.

When you complain that your cable bill is too high or your movie ticket prices are a rip off because they've increased the price so much, just remember why. It's because people STEAL others property, heather tangible or not. The production cost losses have to be made up somewhere. so the honest ones buying the product pay.

It is clearly pointless to try to discuss this with Leehla. The number of false equivalences she's set up has already overloaded my mind. Buying a book as a gift is the same as uploading it to a web site where infinite numbers of people can (potentially) download it? WTF?

The root problem here is that people have become accustomed to the idea that content should be free--whether books or music. That mindset, and the free music-sharing sites, have already more or less ruined the music industry, at least for the little people. I suppose books will end up going the same way.

Carolyn wrote: "Leehla, do you honestly believe these words that you've written?"
Of course I do. I wouldn't have written them if I didn't.

Carolyn wrote: "...I'm losing money! I find it hard to believe that you'll buy a book after reading it for free, but only if you like it. If you read a book for free, and decide you like it, will you pay the 2.99 that the author asks for the sequel, with only a preview to read before buying? Further, I find it imposible believe that there are many folks out there who will pay full price for a book they can download for free. "
Of course I'd buy a book (full price) after I read it (if I liked it). I don't read too many romance novels that I think are worth buying so when I find one that reads like a love story, I'll gladly buy it (to support the author so hopefully she can give up her "day job" and write full time).
If you "find it impossible to believe that there are many folks out there who will pay full price for a book they can download for free", then you shouldn't like libraries either, financially speaking. Aren't authors losing money with the existence of libraries? Financially speaking, to me, downloading a book from the internet is like checking it out of a library. Either way; someone has to buy it first, the reader reads it for free, and (in my case - and a lot of other people's cases) we purchase a copy if we like the book.

Carolyn wrote: "So how do you tell these authors that you're doing them a favour, how do you believe that you're being comforting?"
The comfort is in the authors looking at this situation, not in a way that they're losing money, but ultimately that they may be making more money. (Please see my subsequent comments.)

Carolyn wrote: "Do you not think their craft is worth the asking price of these books? "
Not the way some of these "romance" novels are written (in my personal opinion). These novels are often written where the woman has a negative attitude in the beginning of a story (when the guy hasn't done anything wrong yet) and she doesn't need to have an attitude. But later on in the story, when she should have an attitude and she should stand up for herself (when the guy has done something wrong), she doesn't speak up for herself but rather lets the guy get away with everything and often 'rewards' him by having sex with him. He, of course, takes what she offers (he has sex with her as opposed to making love to her) but he usually doesn't respect her afterwards - which is why he'll often treat her like a stranger or an enemy, often throwing it back in her face. How can we, the reader, think of him as the hero for the rest of the story after he's treated her so cruelly? And we're lucky if he even apologizes to her at the end of the story. It's often half-heartedly done and (for example) the heroine often puts her fingers over his lips and says: "Shhh". I say, let the guy apologize! He should be getting on his knees, begging her for forgiveness and going out of his way to try to make it up to her. It's the least he can do after treating her in such a hurtful manner. But most romantic novels (at least the ones I've read - and I've read a lot of them) aren't written that way.
And it hurts the heroine because (chances are) she's fallen in love with him, especially after he seduced/charmed her into having sex with him. Women will often fall in love with a man she's had sex with. How can she not, after experiencing something so intimate, so intense, so personal?

Carolyn wrote: "How am I...supposed to look their kids in the eyes and explain that there will be less of a Christmas this year because there are a bunch of people who wanted to steal my work instead of pay for it?"
How are readers supposed to tell their children there will be less of a Christmas because Mommy spent the money buying books she didn't even know whether or not they were worth buying (instead of reading them first and only buying the ones she thought were worth buying). Isn't it better that Mommy puts the children's needs first and if there's money left over (after Christmas), buy just a few books? And isn't it better that Mommy buys the books she feels are worth paying for? But she has to read them first to decide whether they're written like a love story (romance) or whether they is (for example) a bdsm element to the book and the "hero" acts like a jerk throughout the book, disrespecting the heroine? That's fine for people who like those kinds of books but they shouldn't be put in the genre of romance novels.
Why begrudge a reader reading books if it isn't going to make a difference, financially, to the author? There are so many "romance novels" that don't read like a love story that if I can't read them first, I won't buy them. And a lot of people I've spoken to, feel the same.

Carolyn wrote: "Do NOT steal our work and then ask us to be grateful
It's theft, plain and simple."
Please see my subsequent comments on theft, stealing, piracy, etc.

So do you pay for repair work to your home or vehicle only if you like the work? Only pay for your groceries if you like the service? It's the same mindset. Libraries purchase the rights to lend a book, at least up here in Canada. So my book being available in libraries doesn't bother me, because I've been paid for that.

I am both an author and a reader, and I speak as both when I say I am greatly disappointed by your arguments to defend your actions and logic. I feel confident in proposing that if you had invested hours, days, weeks and years into producing something for someone else's consumption, you would feel vastly different about exchanging all that work for pay.

Leehla wrote: "Carolyn wrote: "Leehla, do you honestly believe these words that you've written?"
Of course I do. I wouldn't have written them if I didn't.

Carolyn wrote: "...I'm losing money! I find it hard to b..."

Carolyn, don't waste your words. Her justifications are ridiculous and there's not getting through to her.

A.W. wrote: "You gloss over issues of consent and permission..."
Please see my subsequent comments where I've addressed these issues in length.

A.W. wrote: "Using your analogy if I walk into a jewellery store and walk out with a diamond bracelet without paying, that's not theft. I wasn't going to buy it anyway and I just want to wear it around for a month or two to see if I like it."
It is theft, just like if I took a book out of a bookstore without paying for it, it would be theft. (Please see my previous and subsequent comments.) You can tell (just by looking at a bracelet) whether you like it or not. As the old expression goes, "you can't judge a book by its cover". Nor can you (necessarily) by reading a description of a book. We often have to read it to determine whether we like it or not/whether it's worth our hard-earned money to buy it or not.

A.W. wrote: "...by your standard its totally ok for the guys at a party to do whatever they want to the drunk girl."
Excuse me?!! There's no comparison! I don't know whether you're a woman or not but trust me, getting sexually assaulted is a whole lot worse than getting your book illegally downloaded off the internet!

A.W. wrote: "You spend a lot of time arguing semantics, such as pirate sites aren't "distributing" back "making available" the illegal content."
"Pirate"/file-sharing sites are distributing and making available the illegal content. That's the problem (according to some authors).

A.W. wrote: "...piracy hurts authors. It reduces sales and in some cases has very real repercussions for authors when books fail to meet sales targets and are dropped by publishers."
Not necessarily. You're afraid that you're losing money by having people download your book(s) that appear on file-sharing websites but that may not necessarily be the case. Maybe a lot of people (who can afford to buy books) don't think some of the books are worth buying.
Authors can now publish their books for free from quite a few websites that offer this service - for example; Smashwords.com (and they even provide a free ISBN).

A.W. wrote: "I had a series pulled due to low sales and I still get PIRATES emailing me and complaining that they can't find book 2 on these sites for free download. Maybe if those people had bought the first book, there might have actually been a sequel for them to read as well. Instead that series was deemed uneconomic and there won't be any more instalments."
Maybe they can't afford to buy books but as it's more convenient to download a book from the internet rather than checking it out of a library... (please see my previous comments). Before the internet/ebooks existed (when I worked in libraries), patrons were forever asking us to add specific titles to the library's collection.
But you see, if you write more installments/self publish and sell your ebooks on online bookstores, people will have to buy them in order to add them to a library's collection or upload them to a peer-to-peer/file-sharing website. Maybe think of a file-sharing website as a digital library.

Regarding consent, please see my subsequent comments. I'm approaching this discussion/topic from the viewpoint of whether an author is necessarily losing money or not, when people read books without buying them first.
As an author trying to make a profit from writing books, I would be more concerned with online bookstores (such as Amazon) who enable customers to buy used books from used bookstores, and used bookstores (who aren't non-profit organizations) - who do make a profit from an author's hard work. And as I've said before, I'm pretty sure owners of used bookstores don't give a percentage of their profits to authors and/or publishers. When people get a book out of the library or get it from a file-sharing website, they do so for free (so there's a possibility, even a probability that people wouldn't buy the book if these didn't exist). When people get a book from a used bookstore, they have to buy it (but it's at a cheaper price than if they bought it from an online or "brick-and-mortar" store). If the used bookstore didn't exist, the customer might be more inclined to buy the book at full price from a "new book" bookstore. So used bookstores might be costing authors more sales than file-sharing websites. I wouldn't think authors would give permission or consent for used bookstore owners to sell their books.


A.W. wrote: "...it's still illegal circulating copyrighted material."
Not necessarily. I remind you of; libraries, gift-giving, re-gifting, etc.

A.W. wrote: "The pirates are thieves twice over, they never pay for the books but either buy and immediately return for a refund or some join author's ARC teams and break NDAs and social contracts to upload ARC copies to pirate sites."
I spend a lot of time on these file-sharing websites (for their social aspect), which is why I seem to know so much about what goes on, on these sites. As I've explained, members who upload books have to buy them initially and they can't return them to wherever they bought them from (because the online booksellers won't accept 'returns' unless the item is defective - in which case the customer is given another copy. At least that was the policy of Amazon, B&N, etc. when I first started buying ebooks). File-sharing sites (at least the ones I visit) don't usually accept ARC copies.
I don't know what NDAs means. I googled it but it could mean a few different things. If you're talking about removing DRM's (digital rights management), members of file-sharing websites do so (as google explains): "so you can read your purchases on any of your multiple devices, including competing e-readers" including our laptops/computers where we have a lot more flexibility/choices in the type and size of font we use, the background color of the screen, the amount of devices we can use, etc.
You see, as I've explained, it's a lot more beneficial, convenient, etc. for a reader to download a book from the internet (for so many reasons) rather than check a book out of the library. The reason I started this discussion was to get authors' views on the subject (and see if they could successfully convince me that they were necessarily losing money/sales, not making a profit, etc. when readers download books from the internet for free). We know it's illegal because it's in violation of copyright law. Copyright laws were put into place to protect authors from someone else copying their work and getting credit for it/making money from it. People downloading books from the internet, for free, aren't taking the author's name off the book, putting their own name as the author, and trying to sell the book (as far as I know). If someone does that, the author can find out who's doing it and sue them for plagiarism. People downloading books from the internet, for free, aren't making money from doing so. Someone downloading a book from a file-sharing website is considered a thief but they don't take the book. They copy the book. The original uploader still has the book and no one - not the author, publisher, etc. has incurred any expense when someone copies/duplicates an ebook (a file they possibly wouldn't have bought if they couldn't have copied it for free).

So if people are going to continue to download ebooks from these file-sharing websites, if authors can view it as; the authors aren't necessarily losing money or are not making a profit (which I think is the bottom line), then maybe authors won't feel so bad when they see their books appearing on some of these sites (which I've repeatedly said before). I feel I'm just repeating myself and we're just going around and around in circles, and because I don't have time to waste doing that, I'll remove myself from this thread.

In closing, I'd like to provide a quote from obooko.com:
"Contrary to what you may imagine, self-publishing and giving away a copy of your fiction or non-fiction ebook on the Web is a sound strategy that will not only ensure it will be read, but will also help promote your writing and your name. This increases the amount of people who are likely to be interested in your future digital and printed books. And by giving people, especially those who can't afford to buy regular books, a good, no-cost read, you are doing a great social service too; especially to folks around the world on low incomes."