Forum - View topicNEWS: Anime Encyclopedia's McCarthy Decries Book's Copying
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
nadir-seen-fire
 Posts: 90 |
|
|||||||||||
Just a nitpick. Knowledge can't be copyrighted, period. That's what patents are for. What is copyrighted is the text that the author writes. For example this text that I'm writing know is basically common knowledge, but despite that technically I own the copyright to my portions of this post because I wrote it. That aside authors making public announcements complaining about their work being pirated online is getting tiring. This is nothing new, this has been happening to nearly every single book, manga, film, anime, etc... for years. It's nothing new or special if an author finds that the pirate portion of Internet has finally gotten to the point where their work has been pirated. In fact the author here should be glad that the book has been free from piracy all these years with it being sold and bought on bookshelves. The very manga and anime the book gives information about usually get pirated shortly after they are released. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
ConanSan
Posts: 1818 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Hey, Mr. Seven Seas, that's a great point(!)
[completely off-topic, snide remark removed -t] Back to the topic, Ms. McCarthy has a point; want to get something that's yours off Pirate Reactor or Kaster? Jump through hoops like Batman on crack. Want to make something you made free? 9 input fields septate you from the CC licence. It is something of a Diseconomy. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Victor Delacroix
 Posts: 3 |
|
|||||||||||
|
As someone that actually owns this book, I do not need nor have any desire to find the pirated copy. However, and feel free to call me terrible for saying so, my response to this is "Ha ha." Sure, it was an enjoyable read, but I did buy it under the impression I was buying an encyclopedia, not an 850-page opinion piece. It's irritating to see some shows I enjoyed very much referred to as "unimaginative" and other such unpleasant words in a publication supposedly based around fact. It was not fun at all to have to read all the hateful little comments that got added in about certain series (and sometimes, staff members). Not every robot show post-Evangelion is an Evangelion clone. Not every show with glimpses of panties can accurately be described as "puerile" (a word that is overused so much in this book that its unusual spelling was scorched into my brain at an early age). The opinions were rather spot-on at times (such as with most of the hentai), but that doesn't excuse the rest.
Summary: Because the book is heavily opinionated and has a relatively limited vocabulary for what it is, I laugh. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Paploo
Posts: 1875 |
|
|||||||||||
Well, academic research, reviews, and the formatting can be copyrighted- if they had simply took the names of the shows, or written their own summaries., it would be one thing Otherwise it's copyright infringement, and outright plagerism- the stuff that can get you kicked out of universities for years. It took Helen 7 years to compile it [I doubt many teens bootlegging stuff on the internet have any idea what it's like spending 7 years of your life working on anything], and there's stuff in it you won't find easily on the internet, and if you do, you probably won't find much information. It includes EVERY anime produced up until 2005 or so, so it's very comprehensive even today. I imagine if demand merits, Helen will do another update in a few years or so, though I imagine it being bootlegged might cause problems with the book's sales, which may affect future publications. It was mostly just mean and spiteful to scan something like this, or very very inept and foolish if someone thought they were being helpful. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Paploo
Posts: 1875 |
|
|||||||||||
1- It's an academic work, and the way it is written is indeed something that's copyrightable. When you write a review, it is copyrighted to you- it is your words and opinions. If someone had simply used it as a reference source, written things in their own words for let's say, a website or a research paper, they'd be fine, especially if they cited her book. But scanning the entire thing outright is a major act of infringement and a severe danger to her livelihood. She's not being compensated for her hard work. There's a reason why you get expelled from University [often not allowed in any university for several years] when you get caught plagirising someonelses work. 2- It's perfectly legitimate for her to complain when someone endangers her livelihood and life's work. Fans seem lack empathy when it comes to this stuff, and it saddens me what horrible people lurk on these forums when I see stuff like that pop up. Why do people say stuff like that? You have no idea what kind of work was involved with this book, and are very insenstive and callous. Everyone just hides behind their anonymous screen name in their internet hideyhole, with no actual repurcussions for their actions, while a real person suffers. Victor- whatever you think about the quality of the work has nothing to do with the facts. The fact is her work was stolen, and it's pretty cold to mock her right now.... whatever your opinions are of the book, they have little to do with what's right and wrong. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Myaow
 Posts: 1068 |
|
|||||||||||
|
I remember this book! This is the LYING BOOK.
I read the first edition of the book, and while I'm pretty sure the details like the release dates, running times, staff and other useful things were accurate, the summaries were kind of a mess. Either they were completely, radically wrong about the entire plot (to be fair, it was 2001, so you couldn't just Google any series you wanted and get an episode-by-episode synopsis) or ridiculously judgmental. Or both. I particularly remember the editor's super vehement, passionate hatred of "Tenchi Muyo" and everything she deemed to be a clone, which happened to be anything with a large female cast. Even if there are no males in said large female cast. If there are girls, it's Tenchi. And Tenchi = bad. The summaries that were wildly inaccurate were pretty funny though, I have to say. I kind of feel like getting it out again and looking through the summaries now that I've seen more shows so I can pick out the glaring lies again. And, uh, piracy is for stupid losers raaaaaaar. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
crilix
Posts: 208 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Why did she mention CC if she doesn't practice it? It doesn't make her look cool or hip.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
mastertr
Posts: 70 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Although being 4 years old, making it slightly outdated, it really is a fantastic reference book to own. Who wants to read 850 pages on their screen anyway? If you enjoy her book (as I do) it's worth the money to buy it. You can get it used on Amazon for less than $10
That being said, even if she is angry about her works being distributed online for free without her consent, I do hope that it has some sort of positive impact, like a newer version being released soon. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
LordRobin
Posts: 354 Location: Akron, OH |
|
|||||||||||
Uh, no they're not. Where in the world did you get that idea? CD sales are collapsing and have been for years. Digital sales are indeed rising, but not enough to compensate for the loss of CD sales. The music industry is in bad, bad shape.
Yeah, and DVD sales are in the toilet, so much so that Warner Bros. recently forced a deal on Netflix and Redbook to wait 28 days before renting their movies. (Horrible idea, but it shows what desperation will lead you to try.) Piracy is not competition for going to the movies. It's competition for watching movies at home, and that part of the business is seriously hurting. Sorry, but piracy is not a boon to the creative industries. It is tearing their business plans to bits faster than workable alternatives can be devised. (Mind you, I put the blame mostly at the feet of said industries for not trying to adapt quickly as soon as digital piracy began to rear its head. Instead they wasted time and resources trying to fight a war that could not be won.) ------RM |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||||||||||
I concur, and said the same thing as I left a comment on her blog.
She is in the right regarding how to distribute her works, but is very, very wrong to suggest Creative Commons circumvents Copyright law. It does not, and believing such is foolish. Even with a CC license, one does not have power to distribute the works of others at will. Though, these artists know they have Copyright law to back them up in such cases should the CC license is violated. Hypocrisy knows no limits.
You didn't read her blog, then? Per her rant, you're circumventing her income from royalties, and thus, are now a terrorist and a thief because you're obtaining her work for free. Though, she's angry, so she probably didn't mean it that way.
Clarification: That's not what patents are for, which is an ownership on a product or its means despite the fact most products are built from the knowledge of others.
Uh, yes they are. The idea comes from being able to see many, many artists who put their music online at no charge to get recognized. The belief one needs a record label is now being challenged as many artists are finding "relief" by generating revenue without the need to share it with anyone. I've contributed well over $500 to various of artists whose works I found online, and haven't purchased a label song in decades.
You don't see a problem with that? As a consumer, why should you now have to wait 28 days for the ability to rent? This is just a shaft to consumers, nothing more. The mere fact these industries continue to rely on plastic disks for revenue, but refuse to adapt new models, is definitely a sign of desperation. Keep in mind this is the same industry that tried to sue Sony's Betamax out of existence (while relating it to the Boston Strangler) which lead to the current DVD market through technological advances. The digital era is another advance which they will come to embrace in time. For now, consumers will continue to hurt until the change is finally accepted. They're at Stage 4 of the 5 Stages of Grief. Acceptance is the last remaining. 
Last edited by PetrifiedJello on Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
bayoab
Posts: 831 |
|
|||||||||||
But it can be fought in various ways. It's just difficult to do so. (And something really needs to be done about the hive mentality that it is a great evil to send a takedown.)
*The blog seems to forget that the DMCA is horribly outdated and was written for the internet in 1998 and not what the internet has become. **Lawsuits do not make piracy unprofitable because it becomes a "only if I get caught" crime like jaywalking. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Shakudo
Posts: 5 |
|
|||||||||||
|
@LordRedHand:
Check out Jill Sobule. She gives away free music all the time and she's still making a pretty good living. Or Ben Challis of the Ignerents. People were selling his music without his permission, but all it compelled him to do was recognize he could still be popular. And that guy's currently a lawyer(!). Do I believe authors have rights? They must, the law says so. Do I believe these government granted monopolies will ultimately harm them in the end? Absolutely. And they're foolish for thinking otherwise. And another thing about our copyright system is one party (record companies) can force another (artists) to sign away all current and future rights before agreeing to help them do anything with their music. And then bill them for any and all costs anyway. @nadir-seen-fire: Don't get me started on patents. That's an even worse mess than copyright. Like VoloMedia, who claims to own the patent on podcasting and is now looking for "partnerships" with sites like Hulu and iTunes. (ie: pay them millions of dollars for the benefit of not being sued.) @Paploo What part of her livelihood is as stake? If she's trying to sustain her lifestyle with royalties of a book she wrote several years ago, what happens when her publisher (to whom she most likely signed away all other rights) decides to stop printing the book? @mastertr Some people do. And some people will, after reading it online, decide to buy a copy. And some won't. Just like how some people may borrow it from a library and then buy a copy, or not. Libraries are the original filesharers after all. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Sven Viking
Posts: 1039 |
|
|||||||||||
QFT. Music is just starting to catch up, but video has a long way to go -- at least in this part of the world. At least electronic books are getting a surprisingly amount of attention thanks to Amazon & competitors. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
TheTheory
 Posts: 1029 Location: Central PA |
|
|||||||||||
|
Digital piracy has not helped the music industry. The labels, both major and indie, are the ones really feeling the sting. Individual bands have always made their money through touring instead of CD sales. However, with the way the system works, if the label isn't selling their CDs (regardless of how popular a band is and how well they do on tour), then they won't want to put out the money for the band to do more recording. So from that perspective the industry set-up is in danger of collapsing--if the labels aren't selling CDs because of piracy, they won't be able to pay for the bands to record.
However, the ironic thing about it is that it has become relatively easy and inexpensive to record at home. So not having a label is no longer a kiss-of-death for a band. As mentioned above, most band revenue comes from touring... and they can tour without a label. Record songs, put them online for purchase (or for free)... it is quite possible to make it work. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
krelyan
Posts: 173 Location: Utah |
|
|||||||||||
Neither of these are exactly facts. For every article you can find supporting this view, you can find another with the complete opposite. It all depends on how you do the accounting and twist the numbers.
Bigger numbers at the box office are also due to increased prices for tickets. Yes, 2009 was the highest grossing year at the box office, but after you adjust for inflation the real dollar sales show that the trend of the past few years is flat. What that means is the industry is actually losing money (adjusting from 2004 dollars to 2009 dollars, the movie business is about 15% behind). And that last line is actually a little erroneous. Only about 10% more films were released in 2009, nowhere near double  . Also, you should note the kinds of movies being produced. Remakes and sequels dominate. If the movie industry is flourishing why are they resorting to desperate, cheap money grabs?
Sorry for the off-topic-ness but McCarthy isn't just "whining" out of ignorance.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group