

Issue report: You are illegally sharing my fucking book  - philk10
https://code.google.com/p/06th1d-nhom03-quanlynhasach/issues/detail?id=2

======
jmsduran
Let me get this straight: A random Google Code Project is illegally hosting an
e-book. Author of e-book somehow finds out and creates a nasty bug report
demanding a take down?

Wouldn't filing a DMCA in this scenario do the trick? Forgive me, I'm just
having a hard time finding this HN newsworthy.

~~~
yebyen
Didn't you read the part where he links to a blog post, encouraging people to
steal his book?

He was only objecting to the "on google code, where it makes the top 4 search
results when you search for my f __*ing book"

I suspect he is not the type of copyright holder who enjoys the protection
afforded to him by DMCA laws. He just doesn't want to be pissed on his face,
please piss on his back only, see?

~~~
weaksauce
Well, to be fair, he only did that as a response to the guy publishing his
book on google code. I don't think there would be a post about it otherwise.

edit: didn't see the date of the post. Thought the "yesterday" in question was
actually a twitter post from yesterday.

~~~
yorick
The post is 3 years old. The issue was created today.

------
cvrajeesh
Here is the translated version of the project description

"software management bookseller - 2 projects subject Software Quality
Assurance

The you group 03 note:

\- The TestResult in the Trunk folder to store the resulting Excel file Test
Unit

\- Folder Test Unit in the trunk to store source code test unit

Part of you does that person's post into the right folder

The assignments are in the Document you to view and download

\- In a work assignment you fill out to complete his term and then update, and
the completion of the self assessment and complete performance of work done on
the assignment offline

Good Luck :)"

------
tikhonj
This reminds me of the recent post analyzing top HN stories statistically. One
of the conclusions was that having profanity in the title helped your article
do better; I can't help thinking that this is a very illustrative example of
that observation in action.

------
jgeewax
I reported this internally at Google -- looks like the file has been deleted.

------
quinndupont
It is humorous. I clicked, I up voted. Seems perfectly fine for HN

------
shin_lao
Could someone give more context?

~~~
yebyen
Really? Click on the issue link (article), then once you've read it, click on
the Downloads link. There is Manning 2009 Art of Unit Testing, and some random
thai/viet filenames that go along with the rest of the project, which seems to
contain nothing original -- but I can't say for sure, I don't talk thai.

~~~
AYBABTME
It's vietnamese.

~~~
yebyen
Thanks. (Hard to post ignorantly without sounding ignorant)

------
lifeguard
I think the author is confused about what happens when one publishes on the
web.

------
DrCatbox
Somebody is mad about their book being read. Cry me a river. If you didnt want
your book to be "stolen" then dont write it. You, as author, will not control
what I read, how I read and where. So yes, I am gonna "steal" that book from
you, just to steal from you, and then delete it from my computer. Its probably
not worthy of being read anyway.

And furthermore, nobody is sharing your book illegally, they are sharing a
digital copy of your book as a data-file, which is very quite different from a
real book. You cant hold it you see, you cant smell it, you cant borrow it to
your friend, only make another copy.

~~~
islon
"If you didnt want your book to be "stolen" then dont write it."

If you didnt want you car to be "stolen" then dont buy it.

If you didnt want you wife to be "raped" then dont get one.

If you didnt want you computer to be "hacked" then dont have one.

Very compelling argument.

~~~
bediger4000
A substantial difference between "a car" and "a file on a computer". One main
difference is that one actually can steal a car: if I steal a car, I possess
it, and the owner does not possess it. He or she can no longer use the car,
while I can.

The book in question exists as a file on a computer. If I copy that file, then
the owner is not deprived of the use of the file: he or she still possesses
it, and can still use it. That's not theft in any traditional sense.

The other raping and pillaging scenarios are equally nonsensical, pretty much
on the same logical grounds. Please try a new argument next time.

~~~
chrisbennet
If the owner of the file makes his living by selling copies of the works he
created, taking a copy and putting it on the web (where they can be had for
free) reduces the value of his works. In other words, the owner _is_ deprived
of the use of his works because you've diluted their value.

The argument that "you still have the original so you are undamaged" is false.
If the startup you work for dilutes your 5%=100shares of equity down to
0.0001% and the value of your stock is reduced to near zero, I can asure you,
you won't feel comforted by the fact that you still have 100 shares.

~~~
bediger4000
Shares are different: they're like money, they represent value. A copy is a
copy. Humans copy: that's how we made technological progress. Someone didn't
invent agriculture while out on a hunt and then coast for the rest of his/her
natural life on the "intellectual property" and then have his/her descendants
coast on the proceeds. People copied what they saw that worked. Copying is how
humans make progress, trying to stop or inhibit that is going to warp society
beyond belief.

