Illegal CD copy

[Frances IoMParticipant @francesiom58905]

some computer mags issue a compendium DVD as a freebie in place of their usual monthly DVD.
Others provide it for ?25 covering 20 years or so of issues.
One of the electronics mags sells annual compendiums at about ?20 (speaking from mem so may be slightly cheaper) tho suspect their sales can’t be that high. The excellent Dutch published Elector magazine went from print to electronic a few years ago not sure if still going but their e-prices seemed to me to be also very high consisting the cost saving of zero printing costs and the avoidance of the 30%+ extracted by WHSmith etc.

The whole copyright law needs re-examination as the length of copyright is excessive and has been extended by the political power of Disney + the likes.

[Enough!Participant @enough]

Posted by Frances IoM on 13/06/2019 16:18:36:
some computer mags issue a compendium DVD as a freebie in place of their usual monthly DVD.

At least one computer magazine (MagPi) gives away (free) their monthly magazine in pdf form as well as selling the hard copy.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

I am not certain I am totally in sympathy with some of the posts in this thread as the general tone is that someone who creates something – be it a writer creating an article or a publisher creating a magazine is 'in the wrong' for selling that thing at a fair price.

The message I am getting is 'I wish to buy years of magazines on a dvd for very little money'

Buying ME in print costs me about £61 a year on subscription and I am happy to pay that. I have no doubt the publishers are happy to get their share of that too. If a CD was put out at the end of each year it would need to bring in I guess £20 to the publisher to be the equivalent. If each DVD was copied a couple of times for free the price would need to be £60 for the publisher to make the same amount of money as selling the DVDs. If copied more times it would need to be proportionally more expensive. (And that is assuming all copyright clearances could be obtained – and we have been told that they can't for older editions) So unless there is a cast iron way of preventing copying – and there isn't, it does not make economic sense to put out a DVD.

If you think that is far fetched a single digital copy of the Elektor magazine mentioned above is €7.50 every other month – three times the price of a single print copy of ME.

Like MichaelG suggested buy the magazines and scan for your own use only. You are legal and you have the scanned editions for the price of a blank disk – but don't ask for something which cannot easily be provided and which couldn't be provided at a cost that was fair to the publisher and reasonable to you.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Bandersnatch on 13/06/2019 17:23:41:

Posted by Frances IoM on 13/06/2019 16:18:36:
some computer mags issue a compendium DVD as a freebie in place of their usual monthly DVD.

At least one computer magazine (MagPi) gives away (free) their monthly magazine in pdf form as well as selling the hard copy.

This is sponsored though and not a commercial operation. I don't believe the print version has been available for long.

[Frances IoMParticipant @francesiom58905]

nobody is denying authors a just return – at one time the copyright period was 19 years during which the author was expected to earn sufficient – 75 years post death means that it is the grandchild who benefits or as is usually the case some corporate body. Any author submitting material to MEW etc is paid – this should be the reward(ie work for hire) the publisher can build into the payment expected money from selling copies on DVD once the printed copies are no longer readily available (eg 2 years from publication)

[Barnaby WildeParticipant @barnabywilde70941]

Are there any professional model engineering article writers?

Are any of these 'authors' solely in it for the £money?

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

As someone who has had a few articles published, may I say that I'm in it for two reasons:

1. For the joy and delight of seeing my name in print as the author, especially as I have no training in engineering, nor of writing technical articles; and,

2. To support a choral society that I was a member of for 21 years until hearing problems put paid to my singing. In this instance, the payments go directly to the society, and I make nothing from it.

I suppose it could be argued that I am doing it for the money, albeit to support the choral society. On a personal basis, I don't need the money, hence the choral society benefitting.

Peter G. Shaw

[Mike PooleParticipant @mikepoole82104]

YouTube pay a derisory amount to the artists whose work they host but the sheer volume of traffic may make it worth allowing their work to be posted on there. The fact that some popular Model engineering titles go out of print for long periods probably means there is not a fortune to be made from the royalties. Ian Bradley’s Myford lathe handbook was fetching silly money on eBay for a long time before it was reprinted. Len Masons Minnie Book still fetches a tidy sum.

Mike

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

I'm not certain that making a living or adding to a pension is quite doing it for the money ……..

No one could deny that LBSC was a small locomotive enthusiast even if he lived off his writings and equally Don Young retired from marine engineering and wrote for ME as well as his own magazine.

ditto ditto Keith Wilson and Tubal Cain

[Fred KarnoParticipant @fredkarno89128]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 13/06/2019 07:01:58:

You really are living up to your 'name' aren't you, Fred !

Please just read to the bottom of that Wikipedia page and follow the link to the 'Cabinet Office' document

Note: My references are generally provided for the benefit and convenience of the reader …

MichaelG.

Michael,

I made a crack at those who, rather than bother to read the legislation, take their information from Wikipedia and James Bond films. You didn't get it, and now you dig an even deeper hole and refer me to a link to a "Cabinet Office document".

Once again I have news for you. This "Cabinet Office document" is not legislation, nor does it pretend to be. Those who bother to read just the executive summary recognise it as no more than a policy – in this case, a list of classifications and how they are to be applied. It has no force in law.

For the protection of my sanity I have now marked your posts as "To be ignored" but I am sure that will not stop further displays of your inability to learn.

Fred

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

That’s alright Freddie,

We will all read MG’s comments and probably have a good laugh at the content – at your expense.

This thread started out about “illegal copying”. It is just that – not LAWFUL.

Comprendez? End of story, really. Your ilk may get away with it – until someone deems it worthwhile to take them to court for damages. Damages may well be sufficient to deter that individual, as further infringement would likely incur even heftier costs as a serial offender. Out of copyright is fair game to copy – it keeps the publication in circulation – as it is LAWFUL. Denying a legitimate author his/her legitimate dues and making a personal profit from that action is reprehensible. I don’t like thieves.

[Tim RoweParticipant @timrowe83142]

Posted by Fred Karno on 14/06/2019 03:54:33:

Michael,

I made a crack at those who, rather than bother to read the legislation, take their information from Wikipedia and James Bond films. You didn't get it, and now you dig an even deeper hole and refer me to a link to a "Cabinet Office document".

Once again I have news for you. This "Cabinet Office document" is not legislation, nor does it pretend to be. Those who bother to read just the executive summary recognise it as no more than a policy – in this case, a list of classifications and how they are to be applied. It has no force in law.

For the protection of my sanity I have now marked your posts as "To be ignored" but I am sure that will not stop further displays of your inability to learn.

Fred

I don't know enough about the subject to know whether you are right or wrong but I have a good idea. I do however think your manner of expressing yourself is unnecessarily rude.

In fact I have seen much better behaved Trolls.

Tim Rowe

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

At which point I'm going to lock this thread as I have to go out and work so can't keep an eye on it full time, Neil may unlock if he is active today.

[Author]

Posts