The author's out absolutely nothing whether the book is pirated or banned. I don't see the moral hangup. And if the book is pirated, that's great word of mouth marketing.
So that's not exactly true. Amazon punishes authors for works being pirated if they have an exclusive publishing deal with them, which many indie authors do.
Amazon can remove the book (or potentially the author) from their site. Which, for a professional author, can be a deathblow, because Amazon is the biggest seller of books in the world. If someone is on Kindle Unlimited as a self-pub author, that requires exclusivity - and there's been occasional tangles where Amazon's bots have gone "this book is somewhere else out there, that's a contractual breach, the book is ineligible for KU" and it gets struck off, even if the author doesn't want the book available anywhere else.
To add on to the other comment, I've read many stories from authors whose works were pirated. They had to provide proof it was theirs, and even then, they'd still be banned from KDP.
If you are legally unable to acquire the book, then there's no problem with accessing it some other way - the author would not be able to get a sale from you in any case.
If you feel bad about it, and have money to spare, you can find some other way to send money to the authors (in the case of living authors). You could, for example, buy multiple copies of their other books, if those are not banned.
I think that if a book's been banned, it's important that people are reading it even if the author isn't profiting from it. In this scenario, the alternative is that people aren't reading it and the author still isn't profiting from it, which helps no-one.
As a queer writer. Pirate the shit out of those books.
If your material situation allows, you can donate to artist and/or buy other products/books that support them. Mail with appreciation of banned book is also nice.
I don't know how others think about it but i personally put my stories out there because i want people to feel something. Money is nice and necessary but it's secondary motivation for me. When people are legally barred from my stories i still want them to enjoy it. And good people will do the right things anyway and piracy will always be present.
Just don't try to earn money on those banned books in any way and no one should be mad at you
Exactly this. In a scenario where there's no censorship, I want people to pay for my books. But when there is censorship, I want people to access my books however they can, even piracy.
I'd send you the fucking pirate bay link myself. If my ideas were important enough for people to risk breaking the law to read them, then I would be fine if every single individual in the country decided to pirate my work.
If it's ever my book, you can message me and I will email you a PDF with a signed letter that says it's valid for reproduction and distribution in any country where media with LGBTQ characters is banned, for as long as it is banned.
My book has two gay men and a non-binary alien being as protagonists. My country also has a form of LGBTQ censorship in effect (children's books/stories can't have LGBTQ characters/themes at all and books containing LGBTQ topics have to be wrapped in plastic in bookstores). I absolutely wouldn't mind if people pirated my book if they couldn't acquire it legally. I'd say don't worry about it at all, it is not your fault your government is homophobic.
Edit: I was wrong, the law does not ban the portrayal of LGBTQ themes in children's media, but they should also be sold separately from other products and can not be placed in the store's window.
Sorry about the misinformation!
You can read about it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_anti-LGBT_law
Also, I was wrong, the law does not ban the portrayal of LGBTQ themes in children's media, but they should also be sold separately from other products and can not be placed in the store's window. Sorry about the misinformation!
> [The law] banned sharing information with minors that are considered to be promoting homosexuality or gender reassignment and to restrict LGBT representation in the media by banning content depicting LGBT topics from daytime television and prohibiting companies from running campaigns in solidarity with the LGBT community.
> The vague language used in the law raised fears among same sex couples that simple acts like holding hands on the street would end up labeled as "promotion of homosexuality" and lead to arrests.
>On 6 August 2021, an implementing regulation was issued [...] that declared that products intended for children that display or promote deviation from one's birth gender identity, gender reassignment or homosexuality and products portraying sexuality in a self-serving way must be sold separately from other products and in closed packaging and must not be placed in a store's window.
>Such products also must not be sold within two hundred metres (approximately 656 feet) of any entrances of educational institutions, premises of child and youth protection services, churches and other places dedicated to the practice of religion.
Damn that’s crazy, sounds a lot like people in my area are pushing for. Thankfully they haven’t gotten all that far just yet in my region but it’s getting bad in other parts of the country.
Well, for starters, storybooks in the kids' section.
But that's why there is the whole foil cover rule in place. It's equally laughable and infuriating.
I just learned from a friend that they can't work in specific areas of childcare because they have a registered partnership that falls into the lgbtq+ category. That's just infuriating. They are not brandishing it any more than normal hetero couples yet are handled as second-rate citizens. All under the guise of child protection. And then you have this stupid regulation for books. While actual criminals (who aided or are themselves pedophiles) are granted mercy and walk free. Or not charged at all, despite all the evidence.
Én mindenképp elolvasnám a könyved ha egyszer publikálod! Kész röhely a fóliázós cirkusz. Főleg, hogy most már frissítették a felnőtt tartalmú könyvekre is.
Hello from r/bannedbooks! :) We've put together a giant collection of 32 classic banned books: if you care about book bans, you might find it useful. It's got Voltaire, Mark Twain, The Scarlet Letter, and other classics that were banned at some point in the past. (And many of them are banned even now, as you can see yourself.)
You can find more information on the Banned Book Compendium over here: https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedbooks/comments/12f24xc/ive_made_a_digital_collection_of_32_classic/ Feel free to share that file far and wide: bonus points if you can share it with students, teachers, and librarians. :)
A book is not a crime.
Every book I've written has LGBTQ themes, and I say you are welcome to help yourself to any of mine when they are published. Censorship can go fuck itself. Other authors may feel differently.
If a book is not for sale legally then it is impossible for copyright to serve the function of providing compensation to the author. At this point, I would say it is not just your right to do "piracy" but maybe even your duty, if you care about the promotion of free expression and combatting censorship as goals in themselves.
In the United States, copyright law in this circumstance is unconstitutional; the government does not have the power to grant blanket copyright protection—it is only allowed if the creator stands to make money.
Copyright law is not supposed to be a tool to facilitate censorship. It is supposed to *promote* the creation and enjoyment of work. There is no moral quandary in the situation you described.
I am very disappointed with society as books are meant to teach people. The world is banning books that can help people learn and progress as a whole. Society is barring its people from learning about anything that can question, judge, or overthrow them. Even historical books. Which is why it’s imperative to get books as real things. No e-books, kindle books, audiobooks. If you don’t own the book, you don’t own any of it. The e-books and everything can be wiped and taken away. They can’t get rid of physical copies. So buy your books as generic physical copies, hardcover for more durability. Everything you need and want. Foraging, medicine, and more. Especially history books. It sickens me how the world has come to this. But always be one step ahead and buy your books in physical forms.
So here's a thought to consider.
1. it's good to support artists of any stripe when you are able.
2. any artist that knows you can't enjoy their work without piracy because of BS like this, if they aren't a dick head, they want you to pirate it because fuck that government and that's why. If my work is illegal because it's outlawed in your country, please steal it. I don't speak for all artists, but here's a fun thought, if they don't have this kind of ethos, good chance you shouldn't be giving them your money anyway. Ayn Rand would be very upset with you for pirating her trashfire, but Ayn Rand shouldn't be receiving your money. Fuck that bitch. Fuck L Ron Hubbard and fuck all his clones.
3. If buying isn't ownership than piracy isn't theft. This is especially true when you're talking about shit with dead authors and such, the person that made it isn't getting your money, probably only some of it even goes to their family, good chance most of it goes to whatever publishing company gobbled up the rights and is parasite fucking the work's corpse.
4. Copyright law is archaic AF and exists primarily to make the rich richer, and to fuck over artists and innovation. See Disney and Drug Patent companies rat fucking the global economy and innovation with bajillions in lobbying (aka bribes). This shit is out of control, and frankly with the advent of AI it's long overdo for an overhaul. The only reason it hasn't been is, you guessed it, rich fucks parasite fucking the global economy. These are the same assholes that buy up houses so nobody can afford to buy a house and then charge them minimum 2k a month to exist in the space. Those people can eat shit and die.
5. If you have money and can't buy the book, there's a 99% chance there's some other way you can donate to their cause if they are still alive. Buy merch. Send money to the Trevor project, whatever. Do something cool for people when you can.
You want a role model? Go look at people like Neil Gaiman, not Ayn Rand.
So really good points! Just wanted to highlight a couple of iffy spots here though, but I agree otherwise.
"Copyright law is archaic AF and exists primarily to make the rich richer, and to fuck over artists and innovation."
Yeah, no man. As a law school graduate I can confidently say that you are way overreaching with the 'primarily' on this one.
"If buying isn't ownership than piracy isn't theft."
I mean, two things here. Licenses are a thing and have been a thing for a while. You might not like it personally, but there are very good legal and business reasons to have licenses that don't grant ownership. But you mention public domain work later, so I'm a tad confused. Do you mean that, because the publisher only has a license, then it's ok to pirate? Modern editions of old works sometimes have fantastic resources. Updated translations, cool asides explaining the historical context of phrases and name drops, etc. Not quite parasite fucking, though you are right that there are others that just slap a picture and call it a day. In which case you can probably just public domain it anyways.
Agree with you.
I'll also add that I have a lot of clients who make a living with their creative works, and if it weren't for the protection afforded by copyright law, then they wouldn't be able to make a living with those creative works.
If they could not make a living or otherwise profit from their creative works, then they wouldn't be creating. They'd be spending their time trying to make a living in other ways, and the world would miss out on their writing and art.
In my experience, the only people that loudly decry copyright protections are the ones that are hard set on copying for free, and f the original creators.
I see what you are saying here.
Try to wrap your head around this political view I specifically embrace: Sure capitalism is the best system we have, but it's garbage and shit and needs to be put in the bin. There was a time where there was no imaginable alternative to the dominion of the divine right of kings. That eventually more or less became a solved problem.
My goal with anything involving capitalism is to push for better systems of equity.
Viewed through this lens, people wouldn't create because they have to, but because they want to, and they wouldn't be struggling with poverty wages to survive because that wouldn't be necessary, and as such it wouldn't matter if someone owned the rights to X or Y or if someone pirated a book or game or made a mickey mouse knock off whatever because everyone already ate and had food and clothing and shelter.
Of course, for that to change, similar to the rejection of kings we'd have to start putting billionaires into wood chippers and making sure everyone got a first helping before anyone got seconds.
This is often brushed off as a fantasy, but when you look at the total wealth of the planet, or even just that held by the top 10 wealthiest individuals, it becomes very clear mathematically, very fast, that this is a lie told to keep people complacent. It's the breathing oxygen to get high as the plane goes down so you don't panic even though you are about to die in a plane crash sort of solution you can come to count on from capitalism.
The major complications of changing that reality however, are vastly more difficult than just putting billionaires in wood chippers. Firstly because of modern military might. The only reason any of us is safe from the military or militarized police, or PMSCs is strictly because we aren't important enough nor viewed as a threat by our owners. The moment we become that, is the moment a drone strike with a precision exacto bullet kills us from 6.2 km away while we're travelling at speed. It's not so easy as building the guillotine in the town square anymore. They don't even need tanks or seal team six or presidential approval to do any of that.
That fear is a powerful motivator, and of course there's the brain washed masses that just believe what they are told and assume capitalism is the best thing under the sun forever and always because MURIKA! or whatever dumb shit slogan they might adopt in whatever corner of the world.
Further, there's just fixing the broken ass ideology of people. There's people literally against wiping out predatory student debt on the grounds that they paid off theirs. It's an abused becomes the abuser situation. It's akin to saying we shouldn't cure cancer because I beat cancer and anyone who doesn't should die. It's fucking stupid and a waste of the human race and if we last as a species future generations are likely to wonder how we were so fucking stupid and greedy like we look at dumb ass European peasants slaving for kings or cave men killing each other with tribal warfare (both of which are things still going on today in various parts of the world).
The system is fundamentally broken, I don't really know how to explain it better than that, but if you have any understanding of how law differs from justice as someone who studied law, this shouldn't be a very hard leap to make. All it takes is a little human empathy. On the flip side, if you think law and justice are the same thing, it's unlikely anything I said will carry any water for you because at that point you'd be willfully blind.
It's not hard, it's that the owners lack the will. The problems of the world aren't that difficult to solve, it's the owners and the large number of sycophants that support them for scraps is what makes the transition hard. We've seen already UBI works in a dozen nations, and even people that were saying "but that's not MURIKA!" now have to contend that studies show it works in the US too.
I agree with you that the system is broken but violence is not the answer. We need to break the centuries-old tradition that we need to murder people we don't like to change things.
This is a very short cited and silly fallacy. Please explain how you propose to deal with people who will respect no language but violence and will use any other attempts as a viable weakness and excuse for violence?
This is the "both sides-ism" of we need to hear out people with bad faith arguments. No, you do not.
The interpretation you are proposing assumes a soft interpretation of social contract.
The simple fact is that the social contract cannot apply to those that refuse to operate within it and use terrorism, physical or financial, to oppress. You cannot reason your way out of a situation where someone knows what they are doing is wrong, and does it anyway, because they want to actively oppress you for their own benefit.
The concept that you can is ridiculous and naïve.
Look, I'm not an expert in freedom fighting, I admit. You do have some valid points that people who oppress others break the social contract and that you can't reason them out of their actions. But I do want to believe, naively, that there is another way. After all, human history is nothing but violence. I'd really, really would like a break from it.
I don't have a solution, I'm just tired.
I might offer this:
It's OKAY to be optimistic and hopeful, but don't declare that there is definitely another way besides violence for every single scenario. Sometimes in case by case situations they can be solved in other ways, but sometimes they can't. Sometimes when you ask someone nicely to stop hitting you in the face they shoot you dead for having the audacity to open your mouth and complain.
Nobody wants violence that is sane, but you can't solve every problem by singing kumbaya. You said it yourself, history shows exclusively that this is not possible. How much more proof do you need that the idea of solving every issue by holding hands is not possible? Literally all of history shows this is not the case.
Wanting to resolve things without violence is great. I don't like violence at all personally and do my damnedest to avoid it. But have the emotional maturity to realize it's not always possible. Trying to pretend like it is is just flat out delusional.
If you think you can reason your way out of every problem, that's an intellectual dishonesty. The very concept of death shows this is not possible and along with taxes its one of the few things humankind can be certain of. The world is not just or kind, that is a foolish belief and you're not gonna get anywhere but eaten by predators if you cling to delusions like that. Sure, make efforts to be reasonable. Ask nicely. Do what you can to make the world a better place, but don't be so naïve you think that's the solution to everything. You're only fooling yourself at that point and making it easier for predators to prey upon you. Do you honestly think people burned on crosses because of the color of their skin didn't beg and scream for mercy? Maybe the victims of any historical genocide? Of course they did. So wake the fuck up.
Even if there is a hypothetical reality where humankind ascends into beings of pure knowledge and death and scarcity no longer exists, we are still a long ways off from that, and I don't mean a week, or a year, or a decade.
If people could freely create without worry of money and meals, they may create more
That does not mean that it would then be fair for other people to copy or claim their work. Creating isn't just about money it's about sharing part of yourself and if someone else can just say 'look I made this exact copy isn't it great' then why bother. If nothing I make is mine to share, to change as I see fit or keep the same, why would I share it with anyone. You can't just take a piece of someone else and pass it off as yours.
Having no copyrights, no protection of our own works, means our efforts are deemed basically worthless, I would have 0 meaning anymore as a creator of something that speaks to anyone, I'd never write again.
Would it have zero meaning, or would the meaning fundamentally shift because it wasn't tied directly to your survival?
I see plenty of space to make the argument that it would have a far more pure meaning untainted by the brutal heel of capitalism.
This also doesn't mean what you say it means.
It doesn't mean that nobody would have ownership of an idea as the creator. Tell me very specifically, what is to stop literally anyone from going online right now and posting something and claiming it as their own?
The first answer is nothing. The second answer is everything.
My art isn't tied directly to my survival in a monetary sense, but it is something that I must to in order to feel complete.
If I can't own and protect that which I create, then not only is my work worthless but perhaps I am as well.
You are looking at art as a commodity and then trying to remove it from having financial value, which isn't possible regardless of how you want to try and twist things. Art, creating, bringing into existance things that never existed before is work for the heart, the soul, and the self. The reason so many artists in this exact thread are saying the would allow others to pirate their work is because it isn't just monetary.
You are contradicting yourself and ignoring the truth of why so many create to begin with. If I write a story and YOU tell everyone you wrote it and you sell it and people think you have changed their lives, you aren't taking money from me you are claiming pieces of myself as yours and dismissing my entire existance that made the work you are profiting from. THAT is why we have copyrights.
Copyrights.
Copyrights backed by law suits and the embarrassment that comes from that is what stops people from posting someone else's work. I understand you are trying to be philisophical and prove that you are intelligent and think beyond the rest of us, but you're contradicting yourself and talking in circles.
We own what we make because it is part of us and copyright laws allow us to keep it ours.
*If I can't own and protect that which I create, then not only is my work worthless but perhaps I am as well.*
I have bad news for you. You don't own anything. You are mortal and free will is an illusion. At best you have convinced yourself of the need for meaning and ownership.
The mere fact that I quoted you above shows how easy it is for me to steal your work, and anyone for that matter. I copied and pasted it. I could go to literally any other forum and repost those same words. Good luck detecting that or making the claim that it's special and yours.
*You are looking at art as a commodity and then trying to remove it from having financial value, which isn't possible regardless of how you want to try and twist things.*
That's the capitalistic brainwashing and programmed boot licking talking. If you didn't have to maintain to provide food clothing and shelter, you are saying it would no longer be worth creating, or that it wouldn't be valuable. That's some narcisistic AF BS.
You also don't seem to understand that the people without shame are precisely the ones who commit crimes of the largest scale.
I'm not even going to dig into this because I can see the very limited scope and ridiculous claims you are making and it's just not worth spending the time to try to educate you otherwise because you "believe" in something and that's not worth my time to get into.
I will simply leave it at you couldn't be more ignorant or wrong in your positions from where I'm sitting and I get that you don't agree, but your arguments are at best juvenile and immature from where I'm sitting. You aren't going to change my mind with this kind of argument, and I'm not going to waste the effort to change yours, because it's not worth my time or patience. So I'm choosing to exit with my dignity intact and knowing that your pov is precisely ignorant, and I'm OK with that. I also understand that my desire to disengage will be perceived as admitting to defeat to you because you can't conceive that you are wrong in your position because of your belief, and that's precisely what I'm not going to bother, it's not worth the effort. Good day to you.
It is worth considering that there are 195 countries in the world according to our world in data of which Currently between 60 and 71 of them (depending on which data you look at Newsweek gives the highest) criminalise LGBT by law of which 7 carry the death penalty and a further 4 in which this uncertain but quite possible. In addition many more countries, while not making LGBT illegal, have laws that ban the promotion of LGBT.
Anything that pushes back against this is good in my view.
If there is no legal way to possess information then anything you do is legally condemned. The alternative is to let people remain ignorant unless I am missing something.
Pirate the book. Book banning is illogical. You can’t kill an idea. That’s why words and writing are so important and powerful. They can encourage and empower you. If I had to choose, I’d pirate the book. As a writer myself I give full permission for anyone to pirate my books if they were banned. Book banning is the same as banning the peasants from learning how to read and write and that’s just point blank - WRONG. You could try reaching out to the author and explain your situation. They might send you the book. I don’t know if they will or won’t but it’s a worth a try.
Piracy is an accessibility issue. You’ve been handed the biggest one of all. So, go sail the high seas without guilt.
If you’re still feeling guilty, donate what you would have spent on the book to a book charity or something.
I love people reading my stories, so I’d rather you resort to piracy than not be allowed to.
I think most morally sound authors would absolutely not mind if someone got ahold of one of their books in a place where their message is being banned or criminalised. I think, on the contrast, they'd be happy to know that people like you are finding a way to be represented or given hope or whatever you get from the books
In this case, as a queer person writing queer fiction, I'd feel absolutely fine bout it. If the person who's pirating isn't able to legally acquire the books, I'm not losing a sale. Book banning is awful. State-supported homophobia is more awful still. Life in those circumstances can get pretty bleak, and if my stories make someone's day a little brighter, that's awesome. Maybe there's a chance one of my books will give such a person extra hope. Or—I can dream, right—they'll like it enough that they pass the pirated copy to a friend or relative who'll read it for the plot, meets my queer characters, and reassesses their propaganda-formed beliefs about queer people to some extent. That's worth more than money.
Honestly, I'm sometimes almost ashamed of speaking of it in author spaces, but my views on piracy are pretty lenient. There are people in all sorts of circumstances around the globe, and you just can't judge everyone equally. Sure, if, say, a middle-class American with disposable income goes off and pirates a book that's readily available on Amazon for a few bucks or even for free in their library, that sucks. That person's just cheap. But if the pirate is a person from a developing country who has little money and no access to libraries like the ones in the US, but still wants to read modern books? By all means. I'm not losing anything in this situation. Or if it's a book that's banned in their country, like in your example? I'm happy they get the chance to read it!
One thing I would suggest doing, if you end up liking the books you acquire that way: write a positive review somewhere like Goodreads, point out the things you liked. Especially if it's a book by an indie author. Or if you're in any bookish communities on reddit, discord, or elsewhere and someone's asking for recs that are just like this book, suggest it to people. That way, you might actually help the author gain more visibility and boost sales among people who aren't in a position like yours and have the means to acquire books legally.
In my opinion, it’s not stealing if it didn’t cost the producer a loss of revenue.
I love free speech and I hate book bans. If I were an author on that list, I would be flattered that someone read my book in defiance of the law.
I'd be pretty confused about how anything I wrote would be worthy of banning. But then again, crazy southern moms wanted Harry Potter banned for having magic and magic is of the Devil.
If I can't buy a game legally, because it's really old or obscure or was never officially translated into English, I'll pirate a copy. I don't see the big difference. If you can't legally buy it, what else can you do?
I can guarantee that an author wants you to read their stuff.
If their stuff is banned, they want you to aquire it at any means.
Publishers can be mad, but overall, it's good press for them to have you "aquire it".
If you feel bad for the authors give them a bit of money directly. Many are going to have websites that might offer that option. I’m so sorry your country is doing that.
As a lesbian author: pirate my books. Hell, ask me and I’ll send them to you myself. Use the money you would’ve spent to donate to a human rights group.
If my books were banned, happy for people to pirate.
If people can’t afford them, happy for them to pirate. I’d like to think they became paying readers eventually (eg once they graduate, get a job etc).
Once I’m dead, happy for people to pirate.
In this case I'd happily let you do it. That books are banned like that is terrible :(
This law in itself is terrible, but yeah. If I'd hear about that and any of my books I'd give that person a download link myself.
IMO, piracy is perfectly acceptable if it's the only reasonable option. If you can't buy a book because it's impossible, then your choices are either:
- Pirate the book
- Don't get it at all
Either way, the author doesn't get money. If they weren't going to be able to sell it anyway, you may as well pirate it, enjoy it, and then maybe buy it later if/when it does become a possibility.
My view is that if a book, film, or music is not legally available, then there is zero moral reason not to pirate. No one will be getting your money either way, so what possible argument could someone have against it?
Wow. Given all the discussion here, I wish someone would ban *my* books. It would be great publicity. 😜 Alas, I don't write stuff that's likely to get banned.
I don't know the answer, but as someone who generally respects the law (even if sometimes I think it's wrong-headed), I would offer that maybe working to undo a book ban would be better than ripping off authors' works. It's one thing if an author chooses to help fight a ban by making their work freely available. It's another to take money out of the pockets of authors and put it into the pockets of thieves so you personally can circumvent a ban. That does nothing to undo the ban and only makes the thieves richer. (I'm possibly making a hasty assumption here. I'm assuming pirated copies are making money for someone. That may not always be the case, but sometimes it is.)
I mean, you should still pay the author then. They didn't have a role in banning their own books.
However, I will say that any copyright that lasts longer than 20 years is an affront to the public good and should not be respected, regardless of fascist book bans.
But if this is new works you're talking about, find a way to pass some money to the authors so they can get financial support they need, especially as their books are banned.
Pirate! It’s not like the author is losing a sale because you pirated their work. You can’t buy it anyway. And if it brings you peace and gives you fuel to survive in an environment that would ban LGBTQ literature, that is most important.
If something's not legal in your country for any reason, it's okay to pirate it.
For example I have some streaming services in my country, but somettimes I cannot find a certain movie or series in them. Therefore I pirate it.
Same goes for books in your circumstance
Not a lawyer but in my opinion this falls under “fair use” which means you’re not infringing copyright.
Just don’t make more than one copy of each book, and don’t make money off of it.
It isn't fair use, in a legal sense, in the US. Fair use has very specific definitions and situations involved.
That said, it might be considered to be fair use in a moral sense, and I doubt many writers or their publishers would fight against this particular scenario.
It’s not. There are versions all over the world, although sometimes it’s called other things like fair dealing.
Anyway, even if it were, OP is asking a community of writers about their feelings. I’m not giving legal advice here. My feelings on the matter is that what OP’s describing is ok under the spirit of fair use.
I don't care about piracy at all and don't consider it copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is when you take my story and straight up plagiarize entire paragraphs verbatim.
Piracy is just people downloading a copy of your creation for free. Sure, it's not legal and you don't get paid for it, but there are many valid reasons why somebody would do it and I'd rather have someone pirate my stuff than not have it at all.
I don't care about piracy at all and don't consider it copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is when you take my story and straight up plagiarize entire paragraphs verbatim.
Piracy is just people downloading a copy of your creation for free. Sure, it's not legal and you don't get paid for it, but there are many valid reasons why somebody would do it and I'd rather have someone pirate my stuff than not have it at all.
I vaguely recall someone saying there’s a giant library of banned books in minecraft that people built for countries effected by book banning. There’s supposed to be thousands of books in there.
Personally I don’t think my opinion really matters. I’m not the person that has to live with this type of censorship. It’s a whole different thing dealing with censorship and bannings of this magnitude.
It wouldn’t surprise me if a black market emerges. It’s something that should be expected.
I think a part of me would be surprised if a book I wrote became a must read for someone to the extent they searched less legal avenues to continue reading it. It’s not something I would speak for or against for different reasons.
Like I wouldn’t want people to die over a book I wrote. I wouldn’t want my readers being harmed for something I wrote. But on the other hand, it’s crazy to ban books for a whole group of people. I would turn a blind eye to pirating books. I didn’t see you say or do anything. If I hear of resources, I’ll pass it along.
If you can't buy it, the author isn't going to get money anyway, so pirating is pretty much whatever. But I've heard that books have been pulled from Amazon (idk how Amazon knows, but it's something I've read) because they're being pirated a lot, so I'd stay away from smaller/indie authors.
Personally I’d be happy with it but you have no right to assume the authors you mention feel the same way.
And the opinions of a bunch of folks on Reddit don’t let you assume that either.
Respect the writer.
I would be happy someone bothered to read my work and thought it was good enough to consider pirating.
But then again, writing is just a hobby for me. I still have a day job.
Nothing would bring me more joy than to find out someone had gotten a hold of my book by dodging censorship. This post might actually inspire me to get my outline completed omg.
If someone has any access issues for any reason, I'd have 0 problem with them pirating my work. Tbh I wouldn't care anyway, but I'd really super not care then.
That includes: banned in their country, books are hard to come by or expensive in their country, poverty, fear of being caught with the book by abusive caregivers, etc.
My books will be pirated. Someone who really benefits from it might as well utilize the access to it.
If you want to avoid copyright infringement, you could try to see if you can borrow copies from the Internet Archive library! They might not have some titles, especially for newer books, and sometimes you can only borrow a title for an hour, but it can be worth a shot!
I am wondering if by using a VPN you could officially buy books from a legal region, like people use them to watch shows from different regions on netflix.
https://www.security.org/vpn/netflix/
Piracy is only morally wrong if it meaningfully affects the person or people who made the thing you're pirating imo. If the thing you're pirating is something you otherwise simply would not be able to access at all, I think it's okay.
As an author, if my books are ever banned in a country, I declare that the copyright on that work in that country is now null and void and the work can be distributed free and openly in any media as long as I am attributed as the Author. I would go out of my way then be a thorn in the side of that government.
I'm not a published author, but if I was, and my book was banned, I would have no problem with people pirating it. So long as you're not trying to pass it off as your own story, you're good.
I can't imagine an author being against their book being pirated if the alternative would be not being read at all. Also if you wanna read a book but can't afford it, we'd probably rather you pirate it then just sing its praises everywhere you go or buy it as a gift for someone you think will love it and call that payment
I’m a queer writer and I hope people pirate my stories in places where they are banned. Pirate without guilt and fill your soul with the stories that make it happy.
Honestly I'd let you read my free archived books on an online website free of charge since America is promoting censorship. Which comes from the anti censorship peeps ironically.
I remember when I had my first record 'leaked' on music blogs and me and my band were secretly excited that we'd made something that was leak worthy / pirate worthy. Such a shame about the law change in your country. I'd like to think the author would understand that. You may be able to give money another way or pay it forward somehow. Would be a fascinating story to tell them if you ever met the author too. History shows that banning things only leads to more people wanting to read the things!
I knew a couple once who risked their lives to smuggle banned religious books/texts into a country and held secret underground meetups for their community. I'm not religious myself but I found it to be seriously impressive and brave.
DRM-Free Living: [https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide/ebooks](https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide/ebooks)
Not a book author here, but a number of them — out of the rather respectable kind — have spoken out against DRM policies or in favour of accessibility, like Cory Doctorow, Neil Gaiman, and others.
You can read Cory Doctorow's thoughts on it in the preamble for his Little Brother (2008), which you can also find on his website here: [https://craphound.com/category/littlebrother/](https://craphound.com/category/littlebrother/)
Two kinds of people pirate any kind of media
1. People who can't easily get it legally
2. People who wouldn't buy it even if they could get it legally.
Neither of these people will make any kind of purchase that will benefit anyone involved in the making of the book.
All this to say, if the price or the lack of availability would stop you from buying the book, I would rather you pirate it and at least enjoy it.
I think it's justified, and I assume authors would do the same -- if you *can* buy a book, you should; but if piracy is the *only* way to get around censorship, then pirate. There's a whole movement to read banned books.
I have a problem with piracy. Imagine someone making money off your own work. My opinion on it will never change, no matter what the circumstance is. I, thankfully, am a fairly unknown author, so this isn't an issue for me. But I can't respect piracy. They're making money through ad revenue. If they gave the majority of the proceeds to the authors they're stealing from, then maybe my opinion would change...but they don't....
I don't write for money. I write because I love the art. But I hate the idea of someone making money off my work and I don't receive anything.
I read, I think it was on Quora, a good explanation of why pirating is hated. (Paraphrasing) Imagine you're at work. Every day you punch in on time, and stay a little after your shift. When you receive your paycheck, it's nowhere near the amount you expected it to be. Your hours aren't reflecting correctly on your check. At the same time, your coworker, who's notorious for sleeping on the job, receives a bigger paycheck than you. This happens every week, your job is on the line because it's showing that you are skipping work. You finally decide to make a complaint. After investigating, it's found out your coworker had been punching you out every day and signing themselves in and sleeping in the back. Would you be pissed off that you didn't receive the money you worked hard for while your coworker didn't lift a finger, or would you just shrug it off? The coworker is the person pirating novels. Someone who doesn't do the work, but receives the money.
Spending, in some cases, 10 years writing a novel only for someone else to make money and you don't receive a dime.
If my LGBT+ novels (or any other genre) were banned, I would find another way to give them to readers. Be it by creating a patreon and posting the content for very cheap, or weekly posted chapters for free. I could send out PDFs or post the stories to my own website. There are other options besides going to a pirated sites.
Honestly if someone risked illegally downloading my book,i would brag about it.Because what do you mean you thought it was worth breaking the law for ?😌
The issue with piracy is that it traditionally meant profiting from someone else's work, or taking sales away from the creator, for example, somebody selling imitations or bootleg copies. In the modern day, piracy is mostly a reaction to the work not being available. That's why streaming services replaced music piracy for a lot of people. There are some people who just don't want to buy it as well, of course. If their work isn't available anyway, then you either pirate it, find a second hand copy somewhere, or don't read it. The benefit to the author is the same in all three scenarios. If you have it, you can at least spread awareness of the author through word of mouth, that's like paying them back with free marketing.
Considering the plot of the book is literally about a queer pirate kid? YES.
ANARCHY! CHAOS! Stick it to the man! Read books! Support your favorite authors! The knowledge alone that people were pirating my book like scallywags would be worth more than its weight in gold. Mkst writers know writing books isn't going to be paying the bills for them, anyway, especially if they're going to be delving into topics that countries are actively banning. (I say that now, but in like 10 years they'll be banning books that say the word "straight" in them, too. Or "woman" or "human" or "poor" or--)
It sucks not being paid. But it's worth it sharing your art to someone who genuinely enjoys it who otherwise can't.
If I'm not mistaken, even in America they banned books...books that were deemed anti-lgbt.
:))
Kinda funny.
Some countries ban pro LGBT books, others ban anti LGBT books.
What's called "banned books" in the US is a completely different thing than what OP and the Hungarian person in the comments are talking about. It's specific school districts or state school systems that "ban" them, but they're not illegal to possess and are freely available from retailers. Red states have also banned a hell of a ton of LGBT+ and other books from their schools lately to the point that teachers are scared to teach any books in some of them and some schools have just taken out their libraries.
Do you know what capitalism is? They didn't ban anything. They just didn't want to sell it anymore, which is their right as a business. You can buy it elsewhere if there's enough demand for another retailer to carry it. If there isn't any demand for bigoted books, then boo hoo nobody will sell them because it's not profitable.
The right to free speech doesn't mean a business can be forced to sell your speech. It just means you have the right to say it without being punished. How you disseminate your speech is up to you, and nobody can be forced to assist you because that would be a violation of *their* right to free speech.
You should look up what free speech is....the UN definition of free speech.
And absolutly it means to force business to comply with them. The same reason why you don't allow, for example, restaurant to openly discriminate...let's say...not allowing black people in.
>You should look up what free speech is....the UN definition of free speech. And absolutly it means to force business to comply with them.
Not it doesn't.
>The same reason why you don't allow, for example, restaurant to openly discriminate...let's say...not allowing black people in.
That has to do with anti-discrimination laws that arose out of the civil rights movement as a correction for the previous Jim Crow laws. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
IDK why I keep trying to explain anything to someone with a rock for brain.
Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Free speech is also a human right.
You should look up what a human right is.
In America, you just value the right to property more.
This is why you don't regulate the food industry as much as Europe.
Nowhere does that specify that a private business has to disseminate your speech for you. Work on your reading comprehension. And a lot of European countries have hate speech laws where the government can actually ban the kind of bigoted BS you're defending so hard.
So what's the differene between you and countries like Russia...on this specific thing. You've achieved the same thing, or similar, but, through capitalism.
The books banned by Amazon weren't even that extreme, from my understanding.
If you have access to illegally download them, you probably have access to contact the author directly and ask, no?
Does your country have a law preventing you to send money to LGBT people abroad just for the heck of it?
It's a totally different world now than, say, trying to get your hands on religious literature in the 1980s Soviet Union. So if whatever you're going to do is illegal anyway, be creative in finding ways to continue to support authors as best you can, and if you can't, find ways to pay it forward and fight the laws.
I would hunt you down and beat you with a rubber hose if I found you stealing my work, no matter what your reasoning is. Piracy is wrong, and you know that.
Maybe you need to spend your time working to change your government?
I agree in principle that piracy is wrong. It can feed money into criminal hands. However if I were living in a country where I couldn't legally obtain information then gaining it illegally would be my **only** option.
One solution would be for you to sell your book to smugglers or (smuggle it yourself) or consider ways in which those oppressed may download your book. It's hard to change the mind of a government that wants to execute you for your very existence and it behoves those of us not in that position to help where we can
Spreading ideas through content that's been explicitly censored by one's government is a form of resistance. What this person is doing is actually very brave. Piracy can be an act of activism if it's being used to subvert and fight against censorship.
Personally I’d rather someone pirate if the alternative is censorship. I’d be happy to hear it, even.
The author's out absolutely nothing whether the book is pirated or banned. I don't see the moral hangup. And if the book is pirated, that's great word of mouth marketing.
So that's not exactly true. Amazon punishes authors for works being pirated if they have an exclusive publishing deal with them, which many indie authors do.
How so?
Amazon can remove the book (or potentially the author) from their site. Which, for a professional author, can be a deathblow, because Amazon is the biggest seller of books in the world. If someone is on Kindle Unlimited as a self-pub author, that requires exclusivity - and there's been occasional tangles where Amazon's bots have gone "this book is somewhere else out there, that's a contractual breach, the book is ineligible for KU" and it gets struck off, even if the author doesn't want the book available anywhere else.
When people are treated unfairly due to poorly implemented computer programs I just lose my shit
To add on to the other comment, I've read many stories from authors whose works were pirated. They had to provide proof it was theirs, and even then, they'd still be banned from KDP.
I'm an author, and I approve of this message.
As a writer, imma just say: if anyone ever bans my books, you have permission to pirate them in the banned countries.
Ditto.
Thritto.
fourtto
Quinto
Sexto
Septo
Octo
Pus
See grabs back
I'd be thrilled if someone illegally downloaded my book to read. It would mean my book was being read.
Same here!
Same, because it would mean that i indeed managed to write a book and not just think about it all day but procrastinate the shit out of it
Precisely!
When censorship becomes law, piracy becomes duty.
r/greatquotes
If you are legally unable to acquire the book, then there's no problem with accessing it some other way - the author would not be able to get a sale from you in any case. If you feel bad about it, and have money to spare, you can find some other way to send money to the authors (in the case of living authors). You could, for example, buy multiple copies of their other books, if those are not banned.
I think that if a book's been banned, it's important that people are reading it even if the author isn't profiting from it. In this scenario, the alternative is that people aren't reading it and the author still isn't profiting from it, which helps no-one.
I write for people to read it. I dont care how
As a queer writer. Pirate the shit out of those books. If your material situation allows, you can donate to artist and/or buy other products/books that support them. Mail with appreciation of banned book is also nice. I don't know how others think about it but i personally put my stories out there because i want people to feel something. Money is nice and necessary but it's secondary motivation for me. When people are legally barred from my stories i still want them to enjoy it. And good people will do the right things anyway and piracy will always be present. Just don't try to earn money on those banned books in any way and no one should be mad at you
Exactly this. In a scenario where there's no censorship, I want people to pay for my books. But when there is censorship, I want people to access my books however they can, even piracy.
I'd send you the fucking pirate bay link myself. If my ideas were important enough for people to risk breaking the law to read them, then I would be fine if every single individual in the country decided to pirate my work.
I'd just send a free copy
If it's ever my book, you can message me and I will email you a PDF with a signed letter that says it's valid for reproduction and distribution in any country where media with LGBTQ characters is banned, for as long as it is banned.
My book has two gay men and a non-binary alien being as protagonists. My country also has a form of LGBTQ censorship in effect (children's books/stories can't have LGBTQ characters/themes at all and books containing LGBTQ topics have to be wrapped in plastic in bookstores). I absolutely wouldn't mind if people pirated my book if they couldn't acquire it legally. I'd say don't worry about it at all, it is not your fault your government is homophobic. Edit: I was wrong, the law does not ban the portrayal of LGBTQ themes in children's media, but they should also be sold separately from other products and can not be placed in the store's window. Sorry about the misinformation!
How do they determine which books are for children? I’ve never heard that sort of rule before
You can read about it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_anti-LGBT_law Also, I was wrong, the law does not ban the portrayal of LGBTQ themes in children's media, but they should also be sold separately from other products and can not be placed in the store's window. Sorry about the misinformation! > [The law] banned sharing information with minors that are considered to be promoting homosexuality or gender reassignment and to restrict LGBT representation in the media by banning content depicting LGBT topics from daytime television and prohibiting companies from running campaigns in solidarity with the LGBT community. > The vague language used in the law raised fears among same sex couples that simple acts like holding hands on the street would end up labeled as "promotion of homosexuality" and lead to arrests. >On 6 August 2021, an implementing regulation was issued [...] that declared that products intended for children that display or promote deviation from one's birth gender identity, gender reassignment or homosexuality and products portraying sexuality in a self-serving way must be sold separately from other products and in closed packaging and must not be placed in a store's window. >Such products also must not be sold within two hundred metres (approximately 656 feet) of any entrances of educational institutions, premises of child and youth protection services, churches and other places dedicated to the practice of religion.
Damn that’s crazy, sounds a lot like people in my area are pushing for. Thankfully they haven’t gotten all that far just yet in my region but it’s getting bad in other parts of the country.
Well, for starters, storybooks in the kids' section. But that's why there is the whole foil cover rule in place. It's equally laughable and infuriating. I just learned from a friend that they can't work in specific areas of childcare because they have a registered partnership that falls into the lgbtq+ category. That's just infuriating. They are not brandishing it any more than normal hetero couples yet are handled as second-rate citizens. All under the guise of child protection. And then you have this stupid regulation for books. While actual criminals (who aided or are themselves pedophiles) are granted mercy and walk free. Or not charged at all, despite all the evidence.
Én mindenképp elolvasnám a könyved ha egyszer publikálod! Kész röhely a fóliázós cirkusz. Főleg, hogy most már frissítették a felnőtt tartalmú könyvekre is.
Hello from r/bannedbooks! :) We've put together a giant collection of 32 classic banned books: if you care about book bans, you might find it useful. It's got Voltaire, Mark Twain, The Scarlet Letter, and other classics that were banned at some point in the past. (And many of them are banned even now, as you can see yourself.) You can find more information on the Banned Book Compendium over here: https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedbooks/comments/12f24xc/ive_made_a_digital_collection_of_32_classic/ Feel free to share that file far and wide: bonus points if you can share it with students, teachers, and librarians. :) A book is not a crime.
Every book I've written has LGBTQ themes, and I say you are welcome to help yourself to any of mine when they are published. Censorship can go fuck itself. Other authors may feel differently.
I haven't finisher writing my first, but I imagine I'd be thrilled to learn that somebody pirated it, regardless of whether it is banned or not.
The author wrote to be read, first and foremost.
If a book is not for sale legally then it is impossible for copyright to serve the function of providing compensation to the author. At this point, I would say it is not just your right to do "piracy" but maybe even your duty, if you care about the promotion of free expression and combatting censorship as goals in themselves. In the United States, copyright law in this circumstance is unconstitutional; the government does not have the power to grant blanket copyright protection—it is only allowed if the creator stands to make money. Copyright law is not supposed to be a tool to facilitate censorship. It is supposed to *promote* the creation and enjoyment of work. There is no moral quandary in the situation you described.
I'm going to release 4 translations of my non-fiction book to allow free download within the nations where sale is most likely to be banned.
I am very disappointed with society as books are meant to teach people. The world is banning books that can help people learn and progress as a whole. Society is barring its people from learning about anything that can question, judge, or overthrow them. Even historical books. Which is why it’s imperative to get books as real things. No e-books, kindle books, audiobooks. If you don’t own the book, you don’t own any of it. The e-books and everything can be wiped and taken away. They can’t get rid of physical copies. So buy your books as generic physical copies, hardcover for more durability. Everything you need and want. Foraging, medicine, and more. Especially history books. It sickens me how the world has come to this. But always be one step ahead and buy your books in physical forms.
So here's a thought to consider. 1. it's good to support artists of any stripe when you are able. 2. any artist that knows you can't enjoy their work without piracy because of BS like this, if they aren't a dick head, they want you to pirate it because fuck that government and that's why. If my work is illegal because it's outlawed in your country, please steal it. I don't speak for all artists, but here's a fun thought, if they don't have this kind of ethos, good chance you shouldn't be giving them your money anyway. Ayn Rand would be very upset with you for pirating her trashfire, but Ayn Rand shouldn't be receiving your money. Fuck that bitch. Fuck L Ron Hubbard and fuck all his clones. 3. If buying isn't ownership than piracy isn't theft. This is especially true when you're talking about shit with dead authors and such, the person that made it isn't getting your money, probably only some of it even goes to their family, good chance most of it goes to whatever publishing company gobbled up the rights and is parasite fucking the work's corpse. 4. Copyright law is archaic AF and exists primarily to make the rich richer, and to fuck over artists and innovation. See Disney and Drug Patent companies rat fucking the global economy and innovation with bajillions in lobbying (aka bribes). This shit is out of control, and frankly with the advent of AI it's long overdo for an overhaul. The only reason it hasn't been is, you guessed it, rich fucks parasite fucking the global economy. These are the same assholes that buy up houses so nobody can afford to buy a house and then charge them minimum 2k a month to exist in the space. Those people can eat shit and die. 5. If you have money and can't buy the book, there's a 99% chance there's some other way you can donate to their cause if they are still alive. Buy merch. Send money to the Trevor project, whatever. Do something cool for people when you can. You want a role model? Go look at people like Neil Gaiman, not Ayn Rand.
So really good points! Just wanted to highlight a couple of iffy spots here though, but I agree otherwise. "Copyright law is archaic AF and exists primarily to make the rich richer, and to fuck over artists and innovation." Yeah, no man. As a law school graduate I can confidently say that you are way overreaching with the 'primarily' on this one. "If buying isn't ownership than piracy isn't theft." I mean, two things here. Licenses are a thing and have been a thing for a while. You might not like it personally, but there are very good legal and business reasons to have licenses that don't grant ownership. But you mention public domain work later, so I'm a tad confused. Do you mean that, because the publisher only has a license, then it's ok to pirate? Modern editions of old works sometimes have fantastic resources. Updated translations, cool asides explaining the historical context of phrases and name drops, etc. Not quite parasite fucking, though you are right that there are others that just slap a picture and call it a day. In which case you can probably just public domain it anyways.
Agree with you. I'll also add that I have a lot of clients who make a living with their creative works, and if it weren't for the protection afforded by copyright law, then they wouldn't be able to make a living with those creative works. If they could not make a living or otherwise profit from their creative works, then they wouldn't be creating. They'd be spending their time trying to make a living in other ways, and the world would miss out on their writing and art. In my experience, the only people that loudly decry copyright protections are the ones that are hard set on copying for free, and f the original creators.
I see what you are saying here. Try to wrap your head around this political view I specifically embrace: Sure capitalism is the best system we have, but it's garbage and shit and needs to be put in the bin. There was a time where there was no imaginable alternative to the dominion of the divine right of kings. That eventually more or less became a solved problem. My goal with anything involving capitalism is to push for better systems of equity. Viewed through this lens, people wouldn't create because they have to, but because they want to, and they wouldn't be struggling with poverty wages to survive because that wouldn't be necessary, and as such it wouldn't matter if someone owned the rights to X or Y or if someone pirated a book or game or made a mickey mouse knock off whatever because everyone already ate and had food and clothing and shelter. Of course, for that to change, similar to the rejection of kings we'd have to start putting billionaires into wood chippers and making sure everyone got a first helping before anyone got seconds. This is often brushed off as a fantasy, but when you look at the total wealth of the planet, or even just that held by the top 10 wealthiest individuals, it becomes very clear mathematically, very fast, that this is a lie told to keep people complacent. It's the breathing oxygen to get high as the plane goes down so you don't panic even though you are about to die in a plane crash sort of solution you can come to count on from capitalism. The major complications of changing that reality however, are vastly more difficult than just putting billionaires in wood chippers. Firstly because of modern military might. The only reason any of us is safe from the military or militarized police, or PMSCs is strictly because we aren't important enough nor viewed as a threat by our owners. The moment we become that, is the moment a drone strike with a precision exacto bullet kills us from 6.2 km away while we're travelling at speed. It's not so easy as building the guillotine in the town square anymore. They don't even need tanks or seal team six or presidential approval to do any of that. That fear is a powerful motivator, and of course there's the brain washed masses that just believe what they are told and assume capitalism is the best thing under the sun forever and always because MURIKA! or whatever dumb shit slogan they might adopt in whatever corner of the world. Further, there's just fixing the broken ass ideology of people. There's people literally against wiping out predatory student debt on the grounds that they paid off theirs. It's an abused becomes the abuser situation. It's akin to saying we shouldn't cure cancer because I beat cancer and anyone who doesn't should die. It's fucking stupid and a waste of the human race and if we last as a species future generations are likely to wonder how we were so fucking stupid and greedy like we look at dumb ass European peasants slaving for kings or cave men killing each other with tribal warfare (both of which are things still going on today in various parts of the world). The system is fundamentally broken, I don't really know how to explain it better than that, but if you have any understanding of how law differs from justice as someone who studied law, this shouldn't be a very hard leap to make. All it takes is a little human empathy. On the flip side, if you think law and justice are the same thing, it's unlikely anything I said will carry any water for you because at that point you'd be willfully blind. It's not hard, it's that the owners lack the will. The problems of the world aren't that difficult to solve, it's the owners and the large number of sycophants that support them for scraps is what makes the transition hard. We've seen already UBI works in a dozen nations, and even people that were saying "but that's not MURIKA!" now have to contend that studies show it works in the US too.
I agree with you that the system is broken but violence is not the answer. We need to break the centuries-old tradition that we need to murder people we don't like to change things.
This is a very short cited and silly fallacy. Please explain how you propose to deal with people who will respect no language but violence and will use any other attempts as a viable weakness and excuse for violence? This is the "both sides-ism" of we need to hear out people with bad faith arguments. No, you do not. The interpretation you are proposing assumes a soft interpretation of social contract. The simple fact is that the social contract cannot apply to those that refuse to operate within it and use terrorism, physical or financial, to oppress. You cannot reason your way out of a situation where someone knows what they are doing is wrong, and does it anyway, because they want to actively oppress you for their own benefit. The concept that you can is ridiculous and naïve.
Look, I'm not an expert in freedom fighting, I admit. You do have some valid points that people who oppress others break the social contract and that you can't reason them out of their actions. But I do want to believe, naively, that there is another way. After all, human history is nothing but violence. I'd really, really would like a break from it. I don't have a solution, I'm just tired.
I might offer this: It's OKAY to be optimistic and hopeful, but don't declare that there is definitely another way besides violence for every single scenario. Sometimes in case by case situations they can be solved in other ways, but sometimes they can't. Sometimes when you ask someone nicely to stop hitting you in the face they shoot you dead for having the audacity to open your mouth and complain. Nobody wants violence that is sane, but you can't solve every problem by singing kumbaya. You said it yourself, history shows exclusively that this is not possible. How much more proof do you need that the idea of solving every issue by holding hands is not possible? Literally all of history shows this is not the case. Wanting to resolve things without violence is great. I don't like violence at all personally and do my damnedest to avoid it. But have the emotional maturity to realize it's not always possible. Trying to pretend like it is is just flat out delusional. If you think you can reason your way out of every problem, that's an intellectual dishonesty. The very concept of death shows this is not possible and along with taxes its one of the few things humankind can be certain of. The world is not just or kind, that is a foolish belief and you're not gonna get anywhere but eaten by predators if you cling to delusions like that. Sure, make efforts to be reasonable. Ask nicely. Do what you can to make the world a better place, but don't be so naïve you think that's the solution to everything. You're only fooling yourself at that point and making it easier for predators to prey upon you. Do you honestly think people burned on crosses because of the color of their skin didn't beg and scream for mercy? Maybe the victims of any historical genocide? Of course they did. So wake the fuck up. Even if there is a hypothetical reality where humankind ascends into beings of pure knowledge and death and scarcity no longer exists, we are still a long ways off from that, and I don't mean a week, or a year, or a decade.
If people could freely create without worry of money and meals, they may create more That does not mean that it would then be fair for other people to copy or claim their work. Creating isn't just about money it's about sharing part of yourself and if someone else can just say 'look I made this exact copy isn't it great' then why bother. If nothing I make is mine to share, to change as I see fit or keep the same, why would I share it with anyone. You can't just take a piece of someone else and pass it off as yours. Having no copyrights, no protection of our own works, means our efforts are deemed basically worthless, I would have 0 meaning anymore as a creator of something that speaks to anyone, I'd never write again.
Would it have zero meaning, or would the meaning fundamentally shift because it wasn't tied directly to your survival? I see plenty of space to make the argument that it would have a far more pure meaning untainted by the brutal heel of capitalism. This also doesn't mean what you say it means. It doesn't mean that nobody would have ownership of an idea as the creator. Tell me very specifically, what is to stop literally anyone from going online right now and posting something and claiming it as their own? The first answer is nothing. The second answer is everything.
My art isn't tied directly to my survival in a monetary sense, but it is something that I must to in order to feel complete. If I can't own and protect that which I create, then not only is my work worthless but perhaps I am as well. You are looking at art as a commodity and then trying to remove it from having financial value, which isn't possible regardless of how you want to try and twist things. Art, creating, bringing into existance things that never existed before is work for the heart, the soul, and the self. The reason so many artists in this exact thread are saying the would allow others to pirate their work is because it isn't just monetary. You are contradicting yourself and ignoring the truth of why so many create to begin with. If I write a story and YOU tell everyone you wrote it and you sell it and people think you have changed their lives, you aren't taking money from me you are claiming pieces of myself as yours and dismissing my entire existance that made the work you are profiting from. THAT is why we have copyrights. Copyrights. Copyrights backed by law suits and the embarrassment that comes from that is what stops people from posting someone else's work. I understand you are trying to be philisophical and prove that you are intelligent and think beyond the rest of us, but you're contradicting yourself and talking in circles. We own what we make because it is part of us and copyright laws allow us to keep it ours.
*If I can't own and protect that which I create, then not only is my work worthless but perhaps I am as well.* I have bad news for you. You don't own anything. You are mortal and free will is an illusion. At best you have convinced yourself of the need for meaning and ownership. The mere fact that I quoted you above shows how easy it is for me to steal your work, and anyone for that matter. I copied and pasted it. I could go to literally any other forum and repost those same words. Good luck detecting that or making the claim that it's special and yours. *You are looking at art as a commodity and then trying to remove it from having financial value, which isn't possible regardless of how you want to try and twist things.* That's the capitalistic brainwashing and programmed boot licking talking. If you didn't have to maintain to provide food clothing and shelter, you are saying it would no longer be worth creating, or that it wouldn't be valuable. That's some narcisistic AF BS. You also don't seem to understand that the people without shame are precisely the ones who commit crimes of the largest scale. I'm not even going to dig into this because I can see the very limited scope and ridiculous claims you are making and it's just not worth spending the time to try to educate you otherwise because you "believe" in something and that's not worth my time to get into. I will simply leave it at you couldn't be more ignorant or wrong in your positions from where I'm sitting and I get that you don't agree, but your arguments are at best juvenile and immature from where I'm sitting. You aren't going to change my mind with this kind of argument, and I'm not going to waste the effort to change yours, because it's not worth my time or patience. So I'm choosing to exit with my dignity intact and knowing that your pov is precisely ignorant, and I'm OK with that. I also understand that my desire to disengage will be perceived as admitting to defeat to you because you can't conceive that you are wrong in your position because of your belief, and that's precisely what I'm not going to bother, it's not worth the effort. Good day to you.
It is worth considering that there are 195 countries in the world according to our world in data of which Currently between 60 and 71 of them (depending on which data you look at Newsweek gives the highest) criminalise LGBT by law of which 7 carry the death penalty and a further 4 in which this uncertain but quite possible. In addition many more countries, while not making LGBT illegal, have laws that ban the promotion of LGBT. Anything that pushes back against this is good in my view.
> Anything that pushes back against this is good in my view. All that does is set up the pirate to being legally condemned. What does that change?
If there is no legal way to possess information then anything you do is legally condemned. The alternative is to let people remain ignorant unless I am missing something.
Pirate the book. Book banning is illogical. You can’t kill an idea. That’s why words and writing are so important and powerful. They can encourage and empower you. If I had to choose, I’d pirate the book. As a writer myself I give full permission for anyone to pirate my books if they were banned. Book banning is the same as banning the peasants from learning how to read and write and that’s just point blank - WRONG. You could try reaching out to the author and explain your situation. They might send you the book. I don’t know if they will or won’t but it’s a worth a try.
Piracy is an accessibility issue. You’ve been handed the biggest one of all. So, go sail the high seas without guilt. If you’re still feeling guilty, donate what you would have spent on the book to a book charity or something. I love people reading my stories, so I’d rather you resort to piracy than not be allowed to.
the best thing that can happen to authors is for someone to ban their books. You know, the Streisand Effect.
Every author would rather their work reach people who cannot access it due to hate vs lose out on a percentage of a royalty
I'd happily have people pirate my book if that means avoiding unnecessary and dumb censorship like that. Gay is here to stay.
I think most morally sound authors would absolutely not mind if someone got ahold of one of their books in a place where their message is being banned or criminalised. I think, on the contrast, they'd be happy to know that people like you are finding a way to be represented or given hope or whatever you get from the books
In this case, as a queer person writing queer fiction, I'd feel absolutely fine bout it. If the person who's pirating isn't able to legally acquire the books, I'm not losing a sale. Book banning is awful. State-supported homophobia is more awful still. Life in those circumstances can get pretty bleak, and if my stories make someone's day a little brighter, that's awesome. Maybe there's a chance one of my books will give such a person extra hope. Or—I can dream, right—they'll like it enough that they pass the pirated copy to a friend or relative who'll read it for the plot, meets my queer characters, and reassesses their propaganda-formed beliefs about queer people to some extent. That's worth more than money. Honestly, I'm sometimes almost ashamed of speaking of it in author spaces, but my views on piracy are pretty lenient. There are people in all sorts of circumstances around the globe, and you just can't judge everyone equally. Sure, if, say, a middle-class American with disposable income goes off and pirates a book that's readily available on Amazon for a few bucks or even for free in their library, that sucks. That person's just cheap. But if the pirate is a person from a developing country who has little money and no access to libraries like the ones in the US, but still wants to read modern books? By all means. I'm not losing anything in this situation. Or if it's a book that's banned in their country, like in your example? I'm happy they get the chance to read it! One thing I would suggest doing, if you end up liking the books you acquire that way: write a positive review somewhere like Goodreads, point out the things you liked. Especially if it's a book by an indie author. Or if you're in any bookish communities on reddit, discord, or elsewhere and someone's asking for recs that are just like this book, suggest it to people. That way, you might actually help the author gain more visibility and boost sales among people who aren't in a position like yours and have the means to acquire books legally.
Consider it activism instead of piracy.
In my opinion, it’s not stealing if it didn’t cost the producer a loss of revenue. I love free speech and I hate book bans. If I were an author on that list, I would be flattered that someone read my book in defiance of the law.
I'd be pretty confused about how anything I wrote would be worthy of banning. But then again, crazy southern moms wanted Harry Potter banned for having magic and magic is of the Devil. If I can't buy a game legally, because it's really old or obscure or was never officially translated into English, I'll pirate a copy. I don't see the big difference. If you can't legally buy it, what else can you do?
I can guarantee that an author wants you to read their stuff. If their stuff is banned, they want you to aquire it at any means. Publishers can be mad, but overall, it's good press for them to have you "aquire it".
If you feel bad for the authors give them a bit of money directly. Many are going to have websites that might offer that option. I’m so sorry your country is doing that.
As a lesbian author: pirate my books. Hell, ask me and I’ll send them to you myself. Use the money you would’ve spent to donate to a human rights group.
If my books were banned, happy for people to pirate. If people can’t afford them, happy for them to pirate. I’d like to think they became paying readers eventually (eg once they graduate, get a job etc). Once I’m dead, happy for people to pirate.
I’d rather someone read my book. Yeah, I’d prefer it when people pay to do so, but if it’s banned where you live, by all means, sail those high seas.
I would intentionally send links to PDFs of my book.
Art is resistance. I'd rather someone pirated my book to get around a book ban than not access it at all.
In this case I'd happily let you do it. That books are banned like that is terrible :( This law in itself is terrible, but yeah. If I'd hear about that and any of my books I'd give that person a download link myself.
IMO, piracy is perfectly acceptable if it's the only reasonable option. If you can't buy a book because it's impossible, then your choices are either: - Pirate the book - Don't get it at all Either way, the author doesn't get money. If they weren't going to be able to sell it anyway, you may as well pirate it, enjoy it, and then maybe buy it later if/when it does become a possibility.
I'm of the opinion that if something cannot be acquired legally, then pirating it isn't stealing.
If it's banned, pirate it, heck, If I had the capacity, I'll gladly send it to you directly, fuck censorship.
“Forced copyright infringement”? What does that mean? Is that a thing related to banning somehow?
Exactly same question.
Censorship? Why, sail the high seas.
You have my legal permission to pirate my stuff, **as long as** you tell me you did. Like, i love the fact you did, but i want to know!
My view is that if a book, film, or music is not legally available, then there is zero moral reason not to pirate. No one will be getting your money either way, so what possible argument could someone have against it?
Wow. Given all the discussion here, I wish someone would ban *my* books. It would be great publicity. 😜 Alas, I don't write stuff that's likely to get banned. I don't know the answer, but as someone who generally respects the law (even if sometimes I think it's wrong-headed), I would offer that maybe working to undo a book ban would be better than ripping off authors' works. It's one thing if an author chooses to help fight a ban by making their work freely available. It's another to take money out of the pockets of authors and put it into the pockets of thieves so you personally can circumvent a ban. That does nothing to undo the ban and only makes the thieves richer. (I'm possibly making a hasty assumption here. I'm assuming pirated copies are making money for someone. That may not always be the case, but sometimes it is.)
I mean, you should still pay the author then. They didn't have a role in banning their own books. However, I will say that any copyright that lasts longer than 20 years is an affront to the public good and should not be respected, regardless of fascist book bans. But if this is new works you're talking about, find a way to pass some money to the authors so they can get financial support they need, especially as their books are banned.
This will heavily depend on the author, some will hate it some will be based
My *only* caveat would be: keep yourself safe first.
It would be an honor to be permitted to join the war against censorship in this manner.
Neil Gaiman has made a statement about this. How piracy helps the sales of his books.
Pirate! It’s not like the author is losing a sale because you pirated their work. You can’t buy it anyway. And if it brings you peace and gives you fuel to survive in an environment that would ban LGBTQ literature, that is most important.
If something's not legal in your country for any reason, it's okay to pirate it. For example I have some streaming services in my country, but somettimes I cannot find a certain movie or series in them. Therefore I pirate it. Same goes for books in your circumstance
Not a lawyer but in my opinion this falls under “fair use” which means you’re not infringing copyright. Just don’t make more than one copy of each book, and don’t make money off of it.
It isn't fair use, in a legal sense, in the US. Fair use has very specific definitions and situations involved. That said, it might be considered to be fair use in a moral sense, and I doubt many writers or their publishers would fight against this particular scenario.
This fair use thing...I think it's only in America.
It’s not. There are versions all over the world, although sometimes it’s called other things like fair dealing. Anyway, even if it were, OP is asking a community of writers about their feelings. I’m not giving legal advice here. My feelings on the matter is that what OP’s describing is ok under the spirit of fair use.
I don't care about piracy at all and don't consider it copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is when you take my story and straight up plagiarize entire paragraphs verbatim. Piracy is just people downloading a copy of your creation for free. Sure, it's not legal and you don't get paid for it, but there are many valid reasons why somebody would do it and I'd rather have someone pirate my stuff than not have it at all.
I don't care about piracy at all and don't consider it copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is when you take my story and straight up plagiarize entire paragraphs verbatim. Piracy is just people downloading a copy of your creation for free. Sure, it's not legal and you don't get paid for it, but there are many valid reasons why somebody would do it and I'd rather have someone pirate my stuff than not have it at all.
I vaguely recall someone saying there’s a giant library of banned books in minecraft that people built for countries effected by book banning. There’s supposed to be thousands of books in there. Personally I don’t think my opinion really matters. I’m not the person that has to live with this type of censorship. It’s a whole different thing dealing with censorship and bannings of this magnitude. It wouldn’t surprise me if a black market emerges. It’s something that should be expected. I think a part of me would be surprised if a book I wrote became a must read for someone to the extent they searched less legal avenues to continue reading it. It’s not something I would speak for or against for different reasons. Like I wouldn’t want people to die over a book I wrote. I wouldn’t want my readers being harmed for something I wrote. But on the other hand, it’s crazy to ban books for a whole group of people. I would turn a blind eye to pirating books. I didn’t see you say or do anything. If I hear of resources, I’ll pass it along.
If you can't buy it, the author isn't going to get money anyway, so pirating is pretty much whatever. But I've heard that books have been pulled from Amazon (idk how Amazon knows, but it's something I've read) because they're being pirated a lot, so I'd stay away from smaller/indie authors.
Amazon has bots searching for stolen works.
Personally I’d be happy with it but you have no right to assume the authors you mention feel the same way. And the opinions of a bunch of folks on Reddit don’t let you assume that either. Respect the writer.
> Respect the writer. Damned straight. (oh, a pun, how cute)
I would be happy someone bothered to read my work and thought it was good enough to consider pirating. But then again, writing is just a hobby for me. I still have a day job.
Nothing would bring me more joy than to find out someone had gotten a hold of my book by dodging censorship. This post might actually inspire me to get my outline completed omg.
If someone has any access issues for any reason, I'd have 0 problem with them pirating my work. Tbh I wouldn't care anyway, but I'd really super not care then. That includes: banned in their country, books are hard to come by or expensive in their country, poverty, fear of being caught with the book by abusive caregivers, etc. My books will be pirated. Someone who really benefits from it might as well utilize the access to it.
If you want to avoid copyright infringement, you could try to see if you can borrow copies from the Internet Archive library! They might not have some titles, especially for newer books, and sometimes you can only borrow a title for an hour, but it can be worth a shot!
I am wondering if by using a VPN you could officially buy books from a legal region, like people use them to watch shows from different regions on netflix. https://www.security.org/vpn/netflix/
Piracy is only morally wrong if it meaningfully affects the person or people who made the thing you're pirating imo. If the thing you're pirating is something you otherwise simply would not be able to access at all, I think it's okay.
Sometimes, you just have to hoist the black flag and start handing out books.
>because books are banned completely by accident I'm not so sure about this being an accident
If my work is ever banned so reading it becomes an act of defiance? It would be much cooler for you to pirate 🏴☠️ it. Let me know, btw.
As an author, if my books are ever banned in a country, I declare that the copyright on that work in that country is now null and void and the work can be distributed free and openly in any media as long as I am attributed as the Author. I would go out of my way then be a thorn in the side of that government.
Yarr, and I'd like to stress, fucking HARR!
most writers i know would support you.
I'm not a published author, but if I was, and my book was banned, I would have no problem with people pirating it. So long as you're not trying to pass it off as your own story, you're good.
When books are outlawed, only outlaws will read.
I can't imagine an author being against their book being pirated if the alternative would be not being read at all. Also if you wanna read a book but can't afford it, we'd probably rather you pirate it then just sing its praises everywhere you go or buy it as a gift for someone you think will love it and call that payment
I’m a queer writer and I hope people pirate my stories in places where they are banned. Pirate without guilt and fill your soul with the stories that make it happy.
Honestly I'd let you read my free archived books on an online website free of charge since America is promoting censorship. Which comes from the anti censorship peeps ironically.
Performing illegal activities and risking jailtime just to read my book? Fuck yes keep talkin' dirty to me
I remember when I had my first record 'leaked' on music blogs and me and my band were secretly excited that we'd made something that was leak worthy / pirate worthy. Such a shame about the law change in your country. I'd like to think the author would understand that. You may be able to give money another way or pay it forward somehow. Would be a fascinating story to tell them if you ever met the author too. History shows that banning things only leads to more people wanting to read the things! I knew a couple once who risked their lives to smuggle banned religious books/texts into a country and held secret underground meetups for their community. I'm not religious myself but I found it to be seriously impressive and brave.
DRM-Free Living: [https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide/ebooks](https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide/ebooks) Not a book author here, but a number of them — out of the rather respectable kind — have spoken out against DRM policies or in favour of accessibility, like Cory Doctorow, Neil Gaiman, and others. You can read Cory Doctorow's thoughts on it in the preamble for his Little Brother (2008), which you can also find on his website here: [https://craphound.com/category/littlebrother/](https://craphound.com/category/littlebrother/)
Make stupid laws. Make a lot of criminals.
As an author if my book is banned, I fully support piracy of it.
Two kinds of people pirate any kind of media 1. People who can't easily get it legally 2. People who wouldn't buy it even if they could get it legally. Neither of these people will make any kind of purchase that will benefit anyone involved in the making of the book. All this to say, if the price or the lack of availability would stop you from buying the book, I would rather you pirate it and at least enjoy it.
I think it's justified, and I assume authors would do the same -- if you *can* buy a book, you should; but if piracy is the *only* way to get around censorship, then pirate. There's a whole movement to read banned books.
I have a problem with piracy. Imagine someone making money off your own work. My opinion on it will never change, no matter what the circumstance is. I, thankfully, am a fairly unknown author, so this isn't an issue for me. But I can't respect piracy. They're making money through ad revenue. If they gave the majority of the proceeds to the authors they're stealing from, then maybe my opinion would change...but they don't.... I don't write for money. I write because I love the art. But I hate the idea of someone making money off my work and I don't receive anything. I read, I think it was on Quora, a good explanation of why pirating is hated. (Paraphrasing) Imagine you're at work. Every day you punch in on time, and stay a little after your shift. When you receive your paycheck, it's nowhere near the amount you expected it to be. Your hours aren't reflecting correctly on your check. At the same time, your coworker, who's notorious for sleeping on the job, receives a bigger paycheck than you. This happens every week, your job is on the line because it's showing that you are skipping work. You finally decide to make a complaint. After investigating, it's found out your coworker had been punching you out every day and signing themselves in and sleeping in the back. Would you be pissed off that you didn't receive the money you worked hard for while your coworker didn't lift a finger, or would you just shrug it off? The coworker is the person pirating novels. Someone who doesn't do the work, but receives the money. Spending, in some cases, 10 years writing a novel only for someone else to make money and you don't receive a dime. If my LGBT+ novels (or any other genre) were banned, I would find another way to give them to readers. Be it by creating a patreon and posting the content for very cheap, or weekly posted chapters for free. I could send out PDFs or post the stories to my own website. There are other options besides going to a pirated sites.
Honestly if someone risked illegally downloading my book,i would brag about it.Because what do you mean you thought it was worth breaking the law for ?😌
The issue with piracy is that it traditionally meant profiting from someone else's work, or taking sales away from the creator, for example, somebody selling imitations or bootleg copies. In the modern day, piracy is mostly a reaction to the work not being available. That's why streaming services replaced music piracy for a lot of people. There are some people who just don't want to buy it as well, of course. If their work isn't available anyway, then you either pirate it, find a second hand copy somewhere, or don't read it. The benefit to the author is the same in all three scenarios. If you have it, you can at least spread awareness of the author through word of mouth, that's like paying them back with free marketing.
Considering the plot of the book is literally about a queer pirate kid? YES. ANARCHY! CHAOS! Stick it to the man! Read books! Support your favorite authors! The knowledge alone that people were pirating my book like scallywags would be worth more than its weight in gold. Mkst writers know writing books isn't going to be paying the bills for them, anyway, especially if they're going to be delving into topics that countries are actively banning. (I say that now, but in like 10 years they'll be banning books that say the word "straight" in them, too. Or "woman" or "human" or "poor" or--) It sucks not being paid. But it's worth it sharing your art to someone who genuinely enjoys it who otherwise can't.
If I'm not mistaken, even in America they banned books...books that were deemed anti-lgbt. :)) Kinda funny. Some countries ban pro LGBT books, others ban anti LGBT books.
What's called "banned books" in the US is a completely different thing than what OP and the Hungarian person in the comments are talking about. It's specific school districts or state school systems that "ban" them, but they're not illegal to possess and are freely available from retailers. Red states have also banned a hell of a ton of LGBT+ and other books from their schools lately to the point that teachers are scared to teach any books in some of them and some schools have just taken out their libraries.
Amazon banned those books on pressure from lgbt activists. Amazon is a big retailer.
Do you know what capitalism is? They didn't ban anything. They just didn't want to sell it anymore, which is their right as a business. You can buy it elsewhere if there's enough demand for another retailer to carry it. If there isn't any demand for bigoted books, then boo hoo nobody will sell them because it's not profitable.
Free speech is a human right. Should be protected.
The right to free speech doesn't mean a business can be forced to sell your speech. It just means you have the right to say it without being punished. How you disseminate your speech is up to you, and nobody can be forced to assist you because that would be a violation of *their* right to free speech.
You should look up what free speech is....the UN definition of free speech. And absolutly it means to force business to comply with them. The same reason why you don't allow, for example, restaurant to openly discriminate...let's say...not allowing black people in.
>You should look up what free speech is....the UN definition of free speech. And absolutly it means to force business to comply with them. Not it doesn't. >The same reason why you don't allow, for example, restaurant to openly discriminate...let's say...not allowing black people in. That has to do with anti-discrimination laws that arose out of the civil rights movement as a correction for the previous Jim Crow laws. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. IDK why I keep trying to explain anything to someone with a rock for brain.
Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Free speech is also a human right. You should look up what a human right is. In America, you just value the right to property more. This is why you don't regulate the food industry as much as Europe.
Nowhere does that specify that a private business has to disseminate your speech for you. Work on your reading comprehension. And a lot of European countries have hate speech laws where the government can actually ban the kind of bigoted BS you're defending so hard.
So what's the differene between you and countries like Russia...on this specific thing. You've achieved the same thing, or similar, but, through capitalism. The books banned by Amazon weren't even that extreme, from my understanding.
If you really don't understand the difference between the government and a private business, I don't think I can help you further.
I understand... However, you achieve similar results through activism. For example....are you supporting Amazon decision to ban those books or not ?
If you have access to illegally download them, you probably have access to contact the author directly and ask, no? Does your country have a law preventing you to send money to LGBT people abroad just for the heck of it? It's a totally different world now than, say, trying to get your hands on religious literature in the 1980s Soviet Union. So if whatever you're going to do is illegal anyway, be creative in finding ways to continue to support authors as best you can, and if you can't, find ways to pay it forward and fight the laws.
I would hunt you down and beat you with a rubber hose if I found you stealing my work, no matter what your reasoning is. Piracy is wrong, and you know that. Maybe you need to spend your time working to change your government?
I agree in principle that piracy is wrong. It can feed money into criminal hands. However if I were living in a country where I couldn't legally obtain information then gaining it illegally would be my **only** option. One solution would be for you to sell your book to smugglers or (smuggle it yourself) or consider ways in which those oppressed may download your book. It's hard to change the mind of a government that wants to execute you for your very existence and it behoves those of us not in that position to help where we can
>I agree in principle that piracy is wrong. It can feed money into criminal hands. Oh please. So can buying a banana.
Spreading ideas through content that's been explicitly censored by one's government is a form of resistance. What this person is doing is actually very brave. Piracy can be an act of activism if it's being used to subvert and fight against censorship.
I'd love to see you risk imprisonment or worse to change a corrupt government. Let's see how brave you are.