Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I thought the sidebar was clever:

> If you enjoyed a pirated copy of Hacking Happy, compliment the author by: GitTip, Flattr, e-mail, Review

To be honest that bit confused me a little because it's licensed under CC (albeit one of their less 'copyleft' licences).

Does CC BY-NC-ND 2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca/deed.en_...) allow for people to 'pirate' and the eBook (et al) charges are more 'good will gestures' to the author? Or are unofficial downloads still against the licence and he was basically saying "I can't stop you from grabbing this for nothing, but if you do then at least spread the message in case others might choose to pay"?

Maybe I'm just over thinking things, but that 'piracy' comment of his did confuse me.

It's published creative commons, so the piracy is legal, even encouraged.

CC BY-NC-ND 2.5 says:

> You are free:

> to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work

I would not want to make the word "pirate" synonymous with "copy".

Isn't it already, though? From how the media uses it, pirating software/ebooks/etc. is copying without permission, right? So in this case, the use of the word "pirate" is a bit ironic, since it isn't really possible under the CC license, but I would think it is still basically valid.

Except the CC license is explicit permission to copy. So even under the media's definition of piracy, this is not it.

Again, the use of "piracy" here is ironic, sarcastic, facetious.... As such, it doesn't really equate "piracy" with "copying" in a general sense, only in the sense used the author of the website. In a general sense, everyone knows it isn't piracy if it's legal.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact