Ethics Post 3- Ebooks, DRM, and Piracy

        Digital rights management known as DRM prevents access to music, movies, ebooks, and different types of software. It also allows companies, recordings artists, and programers to restrict the way people listen and download things from online databases. DRM and ebook formats affect consumer's purchases of electronic readers and ebooks because both of them limit copying, printing, and sharing information to others. According to blog hug one ereader cannot handle all ebook formats. PDF's and TXT formats are different from when the ebook was created before and what the ereader is now. Consumers are not locked into shopping from one particular provider because there are many companies that people can buy these electronics from such as; Adobe, Apple, Barnes & Noble, and Amazon. This gives them the opportunity to look for lower prices of the same content, and maybe even find more things they never knew about! It does make sense for a publisher or content provider to intentionally limit the use of their formats to others so people won't steel or over-use the data given to them. 

       If after shelling out a lot of money for the exchange of an ereader, and they either loose their unit or decide to upgrade, they will be able to because if they do upgrade they will have won't have trouble, if they did before about their unit. Transferring data from an old reader to a new one is the same thing as changing ipods, and phone, you can transfer things without loosing them. It's not automatic, but if you do it yourself there aren't any extra charges you have to pay to the company you bought it from. 

        A publisher or a device manufacturer honestly can't claim that they are in compliant with the IDPF, ePub standard if they apply DRM restrictions on the content because DRM already has many restrictions where people can't do anything anyway. I do feel that the use of DRM by publishers discourages consumers to engage in piracy because DRM already restricts a lot of things people try to use and buy these days, so if we know things are copyrighted we know not to use them and won't get in trouble. It probably is very difficult to crack a DRM protected ebook and save it to another ebook format because then you need to know how to jailbreak, and thats not an easy thing todo.

         No particular ereader allows the purchaser to lend a digital copy of an ebook to another person because if the book is on one ereader, how can someone get a digital copy of it unless they connect it to the computer? I do agree with this statement because if a book is out at a library and there is only one copy left, only that one person can read that copy, no one else. I do think that all ereaders should allow users to electronically lend files to other users with the same ereader so that more then one person can use the database being shared, also called cross-platform lending. I do think that users should be able to borrow and lend ebooks to users who use different ereaders other then their own so that theres a bigger opportunity and chance for people to actually buy the ereader/ebook.

          If a person buys a book and decides to give it to a friend, donate it to the library or school, or sell it at a garage sale, it is not possible or considered an after-market with ebooks. I don't even think it is safe or good if people sell things that expensive at a garage sale, it would be good if they donate it to a library or school though, even though there's no point. Ebooks cannot be viewed under the same property rights as books printed on paper because ebooks are digital and books are printed in paper, also books printed don't have digital copyrights and ebooks do. The policy that if a ebook has circulated 26 times and the library has not renewed its license the book needs to be thrown out, is not a fair policy. I don't think it is because if people take that book out a lot and the library doesn't have time to renew its license then it's not their fault, its because the book is never in the library. I do think that HarperCollins's decision will increase the ebook piracy because if the book gets tossed, then people will want to get the book from other places in not a good manner.

           In conclusion, if I had to I would purchase an ereader, but by choice I really wouldn't want one. I don't like to read things online unless its small articles, not big books. I like to read books in print and do things on laptops and computers, not mini readers or anything like that. The fact that ebooks tend to be less expensive then paperback issues or large upfront investments really won't encourage me to buy an ebook because like I said before, I don't like digital reading. The features that I like on the ereader if I wanted and were to purchase one would be how big the text and formats are on it. The format/purchasing restrictions that I would be willing to tolerate would probably be buying apps to read books, but thats about it. Lastly, a deal-breaker that would make me buy the ereader would probably be the low price from a really good resource. 

        
References:
Source 1: Digital Rights Management
Source 2: Ereader and Ebook Comparison

Ethics post #2 -Cyberbullying/Cyberstalking

      Cyberbullying and cyberstalking are two of biggest problems why people today are driven to either commit suicide or move far away from where they are now. They both cause people to loose self confidence in themselves from being put down and bullied, which makes that individual very depressed. Cyberstalking is shown through threatening or harassing emails, verbal abuse, identity theft, and many more different ways. Cyberbullying is when a child is threatened, harassed, or humiliated by another child or person using the internet or any electronic form to make them feel bad about themselves at any given point of time. Both of these problems don't just happen once and then its done, they happen until the person being bullied or harassed is driven to their own death.
      Cyberstalkers can be pedophiles, criminals, children, or adults and most of the time are unknown. They can steal your identity, break in to your house if they know where you live, and steal your personal belongings without you even knowing they are gone. In the article "Cyberstalking" it is said that the stalker has to physically harm or try to harm you before police can get involved in  the case, and honestly  I don't agree with that.  What if police wait to long, and by the time they do get involved the person being harmed is already physically and mentally torn apart? Then it will be the police's fault for why that individual is in the state they are in during that time period. To stop cyberstalking, kids and adults need to stop giving personal information such as their real name, phone number, school or work information to others or via Internet to keep them out of trouble. If someone is caught cyberstalking and harming someone they should face jail time or community service work for a long time to serve as their punishment for what they did.
       Cyberbulling has caused children to commit suicide after being involved with any type of electronic or face to face bullying, and has involved kids, children, teenagers, and even adults in todays everyday life. It can be shown through serious threats and insults that causes people to loose control of themselves and do things they know is wrong. If someone is caught cyberbulling in school, or even outside of school they should be expelled and transferred to another school, or should be taken up with the police. It is unexceptable to harm others, even if you're making a joke about it, because not everyone takes jokes the same way you do and may take it the wrong way. 
        In conclusion, I think the best method to prevent cyber harassment from happening in the first place is to not do it at all. When others are hurt, tormented, embarrassed or threatened, it's not acceptable in any way, shape, or form. Parents need to be more involved when a child or teenager is at risk or in danger online. They need to be supportive, and let the child's school know what is going on also. People need to stop cyberbulling and cyberstalking others because honestly it's not worth getting in major trouble, getting put in jail, and physically or mentally abusing innocent human beings for no reason. Also if you want to prevent all of this, keep your personal information to yourself, and be your own person so no one would even think about messing with you
    

Ethics post #1 -Text messaging

        Texting and talking on the phone while driving are two of the most dangerous killers among drivers . Most people direct their attention to things around them rather then paying attention to the road, which is the main reasons for many accidents today. A beep signals from your phone, you go grab it and take a look at what it says, and immediately respond. It takes a minute for you to open your phone and respond to the text, but it  also takes a second for your life to be over forever. Texting while behind the wheel takes your eyes off the road, which causes you to loose focus and cause serious harm to not only you, but to others also.

       Texting while driving is a primary offense because it is a serious, dangerous problem and makes people pay more attention then they ever did before. From the article "State Cell Phone Use and Texting While Driving Laws," it says that 32 states ban text messaging for all drivers, 28 states have primary enforcement; the others, secondary. 8 states prohibit text messaging by novice drivers, and 3 states restrict school bus drivers from texting while driving. If it was a secondary offense people would get the wrong message about what it really means and not make the right decisions they are suppose to make. The penalties for texting and driving is two points on your license and over a hundred dollars in fines, now who would want something like that?

       If a driver causes an accident while sending text messages which causes a fatal accident, they really cant be prosecuted for murder because they have already died. In the article "Celeb doctor was tweeting about dog before fatal crash," Dr. Frank Ryan was tweeting about his girlfriend Jill, and the view he was looking at atop the sand dune. Paying more attention to what he was writing about telling the world, he wasn't paying attention to the road which resulted to his own death and a car crash. I don't agree with the penalty of death if someone gets into a car crash, I just think they should be put in jail for lifetime instead. 

       I agree with the definition that forwarding a nude or semi-nude picture of an underage ex girl or boy friend can be prosecuted as a distribution of child pornography.  Its discussing that people would actually send nude pictures of themselves to each other without thinking of the consequences they would have to go through. In the article "sexting" Teens Can Go Too Far, Director Marisa Nightingale says it's crucial parents talk to their children about potential consequences, because while criminal charges are  rare, compromising photos could easily come back to haunt the teens when they go to apply for college or their first job. The only punishment that teenagers really should have for sexting others is either a first warning, or if it happens more then once, jail.

       I don't think "sexting" ever comes in to the topic when parent and teenagers have their talks, because obviously teenagers have no common sense to do the right thing, and instead get themselves in trouble in the end. Don't teens think about their privacy or the trust they are giving to their significant other with a picture of them nude, I don't think so.  In the article "Sexting Teens May Face Child Porn Charges," it says that parents can help their kids to understand that messages and pictures sent over the Internet and cell phones are not truly private or anonymous and once they press 'send' all bets are off. In the end I do think that teens should be prosecuted for their actions, but not murder!