I only get bootlegs of stuff that's unavailable the legal way. So if the book's out of print, I might download an illegal copy, but not if I can find it used somewhere for a reasonable price. Selling something for $75 bucks just because it's out of print, when you know frakkin right well the book's only worth $10 or $15, is just WRONG.
Karen
I don't really buy this argument either. I mean, would you apply this same argument to movies and music? The fact that something is unavailable for purchase does not grant you the right to violate the IP of the author/publisher. You have no "right" to media that is not available. I am a Doctor Who fan, and some of the episodes are not yet available on DVD. This does not mean it is acceptable to download these episodes off of the internet, against the wishes of the BBC. Star Wars is not yet available on Blu-Ray, but that would not justify the downloading of a high-def copy off the internet, were one available. Lack of availability or your unwillingness to meet the market price is not justification for theft.
And how are you defining the "worth" anyway? Value of something is defined by the price someone is willing to pay for an item. When you say that it is only worth $15, what you are saying is that that is the most you would pay for it. Just because you refuse to pay more does not obligate the owner of the item to sell it to you, nor does it justify theft of the item.
In regards to your point about "if something is not available to buy you don't have the right to download it" I would agree regarding movies (or any physical product). They have to stagger delivery of DVD/BLU-RAY discs around the world due to the time it takes to produce them, build up stock, transport them etc. etc. Why people download movies I don't understand anyway as you 99% of the time are sacrificing quality. I've spent alot of money on my big tv and surround sound so whats the point of ruining the quality of a movie.
HOWEVER, in the case of a non physical product like a tv show it really makes me angry that for example a show can be on air in america and we have to wait months for it to be shown in the uk. There is no reason apart from the american wish to have things first. Na na na na na and raspberrys blown to the rest of the world.
They are getting better and some shows are shown within 24 hours of america. Lost and stargate were I think. But many many shows aren't, and I and millions of others WILL download them off the internet as opposed to waiting months for it to be shown on tv. If you are american you won't understand this concept as everything is nearly always available to you first. The rest of the world are not going to put up with this anymore. Shows on NBC and other networks are avaiable for viewing online once they have been shown on tv. But only to people in america.
We live in a digital world where anything purely digital should be available anywhere in the world as soon as it's avaiable anywhere in the world. The reason it should be is that if it isn't it will be uploaded to torrents or usenet. It can't be stopped, there is no going back. Publishers and producers must accept that they have to think in worldwide terms now because the internet is worldwide. If they refuse to they CANNOT complain.
The argument from the tv companys in my country would be that they lose out on advertising because I'm watching a FOX or NBC version of a tv programme. I would see adverts aimed at amercians as opposed to adverts aimed at Brits. This is where I really think they have lost the plot. Surely companys are going to stop paying for tv advertising soon. How they haven't realised that the majority of people fast forward through the adverts is beyond me. I don't watch anything live now. It's all Sky Plussed and I never watch a single advert.
Advertising will have to change. Tv Channels have got to change. We will be moving very shortly into a world of worldwide internet channels. Until they do people will download form other sources.
In the case of ebooks I can understand differences in release dates around the world as they would not want the ebook release date to be before the physical book release date in any one country. It does make me angry though if I see a physical book going on for sale in country before the ebook is released as often happens. It's a digital product and the second the physical book is for sale so should the ebook. This type of behaviour only encourages pirating activities. The publishers, or tv producers are playing in to the pirates hands. It makes no sense and they must be frankly quite stupid people that they don't understand this concept..
I sense from your points about supply and demand that you maybe are someone that buys and sells collectable books maybe. Or has a collection. Perhaps yiou feel threatened with a loss in value becasue never ever ever ever again will someone who want's just to read a book once will have to pay rediculous money for an out of print book. That whole market of people is lost to you forever due to ebooks.
But do take into account the fact that there will be less physical books around in future as more and more people turn to ebooks, and consequently values will increase. In fact a book will become collectible far quicker due to less being printed in the first place due to demand decreasing.
But It is mine and many peoples firm belief that if I am denied something that other people somewhere else in the world are allowed it is my right to obtain it from other means. I pay for the service that allows me to download tv shows when they are released by the way so it's nothing to do with getting things for free. And I pay for the full sky package.
I reiterate what I said in a previous post. If something is available to buy you should pay for it. If it is not due to the publishers or producers not seeing a market for it, or wanting to appease the majority (Americans) and make them feel special that they get something first, to the detriment of the rest of us, then you forfit any copyright or claim you have. You can argue till your blue in the face about the rights or wrongs or the legalities but you can't do anything about it. This is the way the world works now, and to argue against it makes you as naive and stupid as the publishers and producers seem to be.
One final point. The music industry seems to be catching on to how it works now. Piracy isn't so much of an issue because they have made it so easy and fairly priced to obtain music anywhere in the developed world without DRM or formatting restrictions. How long is it going to take publishers, networks etc. to catch on to this simple concept.
No one is saying it's not theft. No one I've read on this board or this thread is trying to say that it's somehow "not stealing" when they circumvent the publishers who are overcharging them for their product. What people are saying is that in this day and age with the technology that is available to them, that they are no longer forced to choose between letting companies overcharge you (which some might successfully argue is the same thing as the "theft" word your so fond of) and just not getting the product. 
