| It just feels like you're holding the content creator hostage with your threats to steal their work if they don't do what you tell them to (price their content "reasonably"). If I want to charge $600 for my book, I should be allowed to do that, just like you're allowed to not buy my book. I don't see an effective moral framework that would allow someone to only obey personal property rights if they thought the rights were "reasonable". Edit: I've said some unpopular things on HN today, so I'm now being rate limited in my responses. Here's my response to one comment: > Copying your book does not prevent you from attempting to ask for compensation or from attempting to sell it Yes, it absolutely does. You're working in the world of "is" not "ought". This is firmly an "ought" conversation. You "ought" not copy my book, because as part of me giving it to you in exchange for money, I asked you not to do that, and you agreed. > but you are competing in a market where your product only carries as much value as your customers perceive it to hold, and not what you declare it to be. This is only true if people are willing to take my product without compensating me at all, which is exactly what I said originally is "holding the content creator hostage". If you don't pay my (possibly absurd) price, you don't get my work, period. There is no working moral framework in which you get to decide if you deserve to steal my work or not. |
Copying your book does not prevent you from attempting to ask for compensation or from attempting to sell it; but you are competing in a market where your product only carries as much value as your customers perceive it to hold, and not what you declare it to be.