That is nice concerning Ott.

I know that a lot of psychedelic authors feel otherwise.

Any chance you could share his reply verbatim?

How can I share verbatim? It was asked in person, I dont have it recorded. That was what he said.....

"A lot" = ?

I'm one of the "Rats" you speak of and in three years have yet to hear a single author complain.


"[H]e doesnt write them to make money, he's anti-commercialism, he says that information should be spread" seems to be the general consensus - from what I've gathered.




BTW:


I will continue spreading this information as long as I have my scanner - server - and internet connection. Fiat lux.

I've heard a few authors complain and know of several others who feel the same.

If they stole your paycheck from you, then what you do would be fair.

Mind putting me in touch with them? PM is fine.

Who?

And can you share their comments/thoughts verbatim?

Scientific books are often published by university's that have enough money to continue publishing books and funding research.

With art, it may be different. Making good music or movies costs money. A good musician needs to practice everyday.
I think piracy can eventually lead to shittier music, because it harms professional musicians more than hobbyists who only make a bit of music every now and then, beside all of their other activities.

That there are musicians nowadays who don't make money with their music but with their own fashion or perfume brands is telling.

no way

mainstream production/distribution leads to shittier music, because it limits the creative output of the artist to whatever the popular style is at the moment. piracy doesn't harm the major label artists too much, it mostly just annoys the moguls of large recording companies.
Independent labels and artists are more affected by piracy.

Well, i definately agree that they've been making way too much money. Music industry owes it to itself that people no longer buy CD's. Major label artists have been making too much money as well. Madonna, beyonce and shakira get 50% of all the revenues of their albums, meaning that they basically double the price of their CD's. That's a huge margin when you can also get every music for free. It's no wonder people download.

exactly

and pop artists get shafted all the time, it makes no sense for them to build a lavish
house of cards, flaunting their temporary wealth with flashy cars and whatnot. they may eventually end up like Hammer (bankrupt).

as for books...the financial analogy may be similar for large publishing companies vs. small presses. large companies always get exclusive licensing rights for distributing media, whether it be printed text or polycarbonate discs.

I think the biggest grey area, and the subject of much controversy, is the concept of "intellectual property".
James Hetfield once tried to sue over a chord progression, which is just ridiculous. you can't patent a series of chords.

I did in one case of an author who knows over a dozen psychedelic authors.

I also paraphrased something that the Shulgins said about the topic.
It would be pretty easy to get a lot of authors to condemn piracy as theft, they often do at conferences.

Ott in an interview in the ER talks about how there was a time he could not afford to publish, I am sure he appreciates that stealing someones work and income when all they are trying to do is cover the cost of their living expenses is wrong. But then he is pretty commercial in the sense of his business projects, his primary source of income has never been his books. As a producer of conferences he is known to charge hundreds of dollars for tickets, clearly he has a history of selling information and denying access to those who cannot afford it.

The music situation regarding piracy is totally different than that of self published authors, it is a different topic altogether.

A1pha Try pachanot@keepertrout.net and ask him about this issue.

Sorry, but who's that?

Even with the author's opinion that you chose to share, you withheld the name...has this author said this publicly? Are these other authors on the record as being anti-piracy? I just feel that if they're vehemently opposed to piracy, they'd let others in the community know by more than word of mouth. It would be pretty easy to make this argument a non-starter on their part.

You don't know about Trout?
Ok, here
http://www.erowid.org/li...ayahuasca_apa/aya1.shtml
This is one of his books that he put online so people could have free access to it.

He has written many amazing books about psychedelics and has contributed a great deal to the wealth of knowledge on the topics of psychedelic cacti, ayahuasca and DMT containing plants.

http://www.troutsnotes.com/
http://www.largelyaccurateinformationmedia.com/
http://www.troutsnotes.com/sc/TNinfo.htm

The Shulgins have condemned piracy in public.
Basically everyone in the community knows this, it isn't a secret.

I don't have much time to contact Trout and I haven't seen anything of his in my collection. As to the Shulgins I have not heard a complaint. I have a few of his works in my collection and will gladly remove them if you have Sasha contact us here.

Any other authors you care to mention since apparently everyone in the community knows this?

The Shulgins have already been addressed by Entropymancer and others...who else?

Edit: Also, Trout allows for reproduction on material for educational/research purposes, iirc.

Sasha is not well, it isn't worth his time to come here and say what has already been said.
Trout is totally opposed to piracy, but he does encourage sharing information.

I know about Trout. And I think that in the context of Trout, some of Melodic Catastrophe's comments earlier in the thread are particularly relevant:



Some of Trout's books are very handy references for people with highly specialized interests. Psychonauts, people who interested in entheogens or in psychoactive plants or chemicals, are already a pretty narrow slice of the general population. Trout's books are really aimed at only a small portion of psychonauts, ones who want citation-dense references on the physical properties of chemicals and on the chemical compositions of plants. There is no narrative flow to engage a more casual reader. So considering the very small audience his books are aimed at, I can imagine that the volume of sales is similarly small. I wonder whether putting money upfront to self-publish is really the best strategy, or whether he might be better-served by a print-on-demand service. At any rate, I sympathize with his desire to cover the cost of publishing... but if he's writing these specialized volumes with the idea that they'll lead to much personal profit, I think he needs to consider his market and reassess his expectations.

Also, as MelodicCatastrophe alluded to, publishing is only the first step in selling a book. I think Trout's sales probably suffer from a lack of attention to distribution. His webpage is kind of a mess to navigate. And even if you're set on buying one of his books, it's not always easy to do. For example, when I went to buy a copy of Some Simple Tryptamines, I first went to his page announcing that the second edition is available. There's no purchase link on the site, but it mentions that BouncingBear carries the book. So I went to BouncingBear, and it turns out they no longer carry it. Apparently the EntheogenReview site does carry the book, but I was unable to find it on their list of books they carry. I ended up emailing Trout and buying the book directly from him. I succeeded in buying the book only because I was determined to do it... most people casually thinking about buying a book would probably not be so tenacious.

Also, Trout is a pretty obscure author. That a1pha didn't know who you were referring to with that email address is evidence of this. His work has been reviewed on Erowid, and his nom de plume is familiar to readers of the Entheogen Review. But if he wants to sell more books, he needs more exposure... The internet provides a perfect vehicle for this. On a sociological note, I wonder whether his pseudonym might have a negative impact on his sales. His books are pretty technical, and I could imagine some would-be customers being dissuaded by a pseudonym like "Keeper of the Trout"... it just seems a bit odd juxtaposed with the sort of books he writes. I suspect that Trout's Notes by Bernard K. Trout would sell a little better than Trout's Notes by The Keeper of the Trout. While I might be wrong, I can't help but wonder. Also, while it probably has little to no effect on his sales, I do periodically find myself put off by his fondness for Comic Sans... the font is just so out of sync with the subject matter.

A final point: If Trout's notes are so widely pirated that it's hurting his sales, why couldn't I find pirated versions of any of his works? Maybe there are pirated versions floating around out there, but if so, they're very difficult to find. And if they're that difficult to find, I can't imagine that it's having much impact on his sales.

I can understand that Trout is frustrated by the fact that his books don't sell all that well. They contain a lot of great information, and he has every reason to be proud of his work. But they're aimed at a very small demographic. And they can be very difficult to buy due to inefficient distribution. I've only bought one other book where I had to email the author and purchase directly from them. I think it's a good rule of thumb that most people won't buy a book when they have to go to that much effort.

All of which brings us back to this:

Albert, I don't think anyone is asking Sasha to come here and comment himself. We're just trying to understand how a man whose works have not been pirated (at least not to any meaningful extent) can be hurt by piracy.