/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5168066
Just buy the textbooks.

The people who make them put a lot of effort in them.
You should not steal them, and not pay.

>>5168069
Can't afford 50+ pounds each for a textbook sorry

>>5168080
And I can not afford several thousand dolars for a brand new Porsche.
But I do not steal one.

>>5168087
if you could make an exact duplicate of one you probably would

>>5168069
lulz

>>5168069
>>5168087
he's not stealing

>>5168098
Obviously intellectual property differs to physical objects. Well done.

If you think it is therefore okay to steal it just because it is not a physical object, then anytime anybody made music, or film, or a book, they would sell one copy, and then nobody else would ever ever buy one, because they could have it for free.
They would make no money

Nobody would bother to make music, or films, or books, or any intellectual property.

The world would be a much sadder and more boring place.

>>5168142
Yes he is.

>>5168160
>steal: to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.

nope

>>5168174
>to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right
That is exactly what he is doing.
Intellectual property is still property.

Google.

Download gentoomenlibrary, too.

>>5168160
>Nobody would bother to make music, or films, or books, or any intellectual property.

I don't believe that would be the case, at least not with textbooks. But yeah generally I pay for books if they are not extortionate.

>>5168228
How would it not?
Do you truly believe people would keep making textbooks if they barely sold any, and people just stole all the information?

>But yeah generally I pay for books if they are not extortionate.
That is not for you to decide.

If you do not choose to pay the price, then it should not be in your possession at all.

If the price was truly extortionate, then few people would buy it, and would instead take cheaper textbooks. The person who makes and sells extortionately priced textbooks would lose out to the competition.

But this does not mean that it is ever acceptable to steal.

>>5168237
It's no different from me going into the library to look at it, so.

>>5168181
try again
>to take

>>5168237
You're arguing shit you don't understand. If OP has access to the book at the library because of his school paying for the intellectual property rights but instead of travelling to the library to read it he dls a pirated copy is still stealing? fucking faggot

Knowledge must be spread, regardless of green paper being acquired or not. If everybody into science and education (public libraries, the internet) the world wouldn't depend on the circulation of green paper but on the circulation of ideas. Steal that shit for the sake of the future.

Borrow books from your uni library faggot

>>5168266
Illegal downloading is illegal.
Going to a library is not.

>>5168282
Yes, taking data is taking.

>>5168295
Yes, it is still stealing and it is still illegal.

>>5168332
>If you think it is therefore okay to steal it just because it is not a physical object, then anytime anybody made music, or film, or a book, they would sell one copy, and then nobody else would ever ever buy one, because they could have it for free.
>They would make no money
>Nobody would bother to make music, or films, or books, or any intellectual property.
>The world would be a much sadder and more boring place.

It is not ok.

The way you people try and justify stealing as somehow HELPING the creators of the material is bizarre and astounding. At least have the guts to say you're just a dick and don't care.

Intellectual property as it is currently managed is pretty fucked up, and there are definitely major problems with the way it's run. But that really doesn't make it alright to just take the work that people put a lot of time and effort into. Just because it is not a physical object doesn't mean it has no value.

If you just want bare bones presentation of facts and derivations, that indeed should be free, and it is. Just go to the relevant wikipedia article or do a simple google search. But textbooks take a specific author's interpretation of the material and take a large amount of effort to develop the presentation and pedagogical aspects, and it is completely within their rights to charge for the time they put into the work.

If you are looking for cheap textbooks, check out the publisher Dover. They republish the cream of the crop in cheap paperbacks that are generally less than $20.

If you are looking for free learning material, lots of universities are now putting lectures and course material online. MIT Open CourseWare and the ilk. Also go to your school's library. If you are not in school, you can often get a library card for non-students at a local university, or just read at the library. Check wikipedia, and try and see if any webpages on a google search have the material you are interested in. What subject in particular are you looking for?

copying =/= stealing

>>5168066
got a few sources for ya, OP

gen.lib.rus.ec/
www.ebookee.com/
www.pdfqueen.com/
avaxsearch.com/
bib.tiera.ru/static
www.51cnnet.net/directory

and moralfags can GTFO,
pic related

>>5168417
1st one doesnt seem to work, the rest should be good

>>5168417
That picture is idiotic. Intellectual property theft is a crime, irregardless of how you rename it.

>>5168437
as has already been said, the same stuff can be found for free in a library
its just inconvenient
why should they have to go all the way to a library to see what they can easily see at home, if they just download it?

and yeh, i get its a crime and that the TPB guys got nailed for it, but i dont really see t as much of a big deal

if I pirate a book I've already bought is it still immoral?

>>5168477
erm, why the fuck would you need to?

and no, obviously
once you own it, you can copy it as many times as you like, thats why celling blank cds/tapes aint illegal

you just aint allowed to SELL your copies.

Information should be free, and thus, op I give you

LIBGEN.INFO

everything from The Road to Topology and Discrete Mathematics

>Nobody would bother to make music, or films, or books, or any intellectual property.

Please explain the following, which are just a few examples:
* http://www.jamendo.com/en/
* http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/movies/
* The entire open source movement.

Copyright infringement is not theft. When you steal something from someone, that person no longer has what you stole.

I agree that money is the driving incentive behind most mainstream creation, but most mainstream creation is mass-manufactured shit anyway and I would not really miss it if it were gone. People will continue to produce content just as they have throughout all of human history.

With the advent of crowdfunding projects, those with talent will be able to raise the money they need for professional work and there will always be people willing to pay the artists and producers for their content (instead of paying for a fucking legal team that retards human progress).

In the end, we all benefit from a culture that shares. That extends to scientific research via open-access articles, 3D printing templates when that becomes wide-spread, etc.

The price of this is that some people will leech off the system. So fucking what? The benefits are more than enough to justify that.

Deal with it.

inb4 troll'd u

>>5168503
>inb4 troll'd u
nah, moralfags actually believe their shit

OP here, thanks for the tips guise.

>>5168503
>When you steal something from someone, that person no longer has what you stole.

Hey, you took my idea! Don't patent that!