Anybody else got Bentley guilt?

[Gayle]

Let me profess my partial innocence before I profess my guilt. My car came with a Bentley as I bought Charlie from an enthusiast. I rationalized that because I wasn't robbing the author of a sale when I down loaded a pdf copy, because I wouldn't be buying one anyway.

I have been complicit in trying to help others get one, like last summer I tried to email a copy to that poor woman in the carribean with the overheating problems and no bmw mechanics because she had so few resources. The fact that it didn't go through doesn't change the fact that I tried to rob the author. I have been complicit in the current Bentley binge in ways I don't care to admit.

How many e34s are there on the road? They die every day. How many potential buyers are there for Bentley manuals? The number of potential customers is constantly shrinking due to the diminishing number of e34s and due to all of us who get them free. I had a stats professor in grad school who wrote his own textbook. He concluded at the end that he made minimum wage for his efforts because it took sooooo much time and he sold so few copies because the publisher wouldn't go for a second edition. Minimum wage is probably what this guy is going to get because we are all ripping him off.

I know that free downloads are part of the culture with music and movies, but I don't do it there cause I know if artists don't make money they won't make music or movies. Is the Bentley going to go out of print cause it isn't making any money?

I am wishing there was some way to make it right to this guy. Think we can have a bake sale and raise $40-50 for each copy we have pirated? Anyone have a serious idea about something that could be done to make it right?

I am not trying to make anyone feel bad. I am not pointing any fingers. I hope I am not alienating my friends on this board. I just think it is time that this point of view was expressed. I just kept waiting for someone else to do it. Any those of you who know how I participated in this current round can silently condem me for being a hypocrite and a flip-flopper. I deserve it.

[stx133]

i own a copy of the Bentley manual, purchased new at great expence. i would still like to have the electronic copy to be able to print off the page i am working on to keep the manual out of the grease.

[liquidtiger720]

You have a very good point Gayle...I thank you for bringing it up. I completely agree with you. At the moment, I won't discuss anymore...but will soon.

In my own defense, I did download the copy, but I did shell out the $50 for the paper version...so I'm to feeling all too quilty for having a backup/ computer referance.

[Beez540]

wow... I didn't even know about a downloadable version. I would've gotten ahold of that along time ago had I known. I'm still trying to score a paper version at a decent price.

[uscharalph]

i own a copy of the Bentley manual, purchased new at great expence. i would still like to have the electronic copy to be able to print off the page i am working on to keep the manual out of the grease.
That is exactly how I use the electronic version. I bought one paper copy and I might buy another for work. I feel no guilt at all.

[winfred]

i've got 5 or 6 different bentleys of my own so piss on em ill steal anything i can get i have given him enough money :D

[Rus]

I can't say that I experience any guilt for downloading the Bentley manual. However, it is pretty hard to find a book store in New Orleans right now that might have this manual. If I do get a chance to purchase the paper copy, I would definitely do that. Not only because it supports the publisher, but also because the electronic copy is missing the majority of the electrical diagrams. Besides, when at leisure, its much more convenient to read a paper repair manual than to stare at a computer screen :-D (Interpret leisure as you like... :)) Just my $.02

[uscharalph]

I can't say that I experience any guilt for downloading the Bentley manual. However, it is pretty hard to find a book store in New Orleans right now that might have this manual. If I do get a chance to purchase the paper copy, I would definitely do that. Not only because it supports the publisher, but also because the electronic copy is missing the majority of the electrical diagrams. Besides, when at leisure, its much more convenient to read a paper repair manual than to stare at a computer screen :-D (Interpret leisure as you like... :)) Just my $.02
I don't think an electronic copy can ever really replace the hard copy.

[Kalevera]

Gayle was very nice about it, now I'll be the jerk.

First, let me explain that I believe that once you've bought it - ie., paid the royalties to the author/publisher - you own it and are entitled to use the information in it for personal endeavor. I own a copy of the Bentley E34 manual, for which I chucked up $51.95 shipped from Alldirect.com via Amazon about a year ago. Yes, I thought it was a lot of money to spend on an automotive book at the time. The book has paid for itself in saved time and knowledge acquisition 100x over. In my judgement, having a digital copy of a purchased book is within the limits of the copyright -- after all, even Microsoft will let software "owners" keep a backup copy of original CDs.

Second, given the amount of time and effort I'm putting into writing this message, you should assimilate that I'm disturbed by the blatantly offensive intellectual piracy occuring under our very noses. I don't know Charles Burke, editor extraordinare of aforementioned manual, but I know he spent years writing it. I know that there's a limited market for Bentley manuals, and that new ones only get written because buyers within a limited market hand over cash for them.

When people stop buying and start stealing this kind of information, the quality of future tomes is arguably worse. Case in point: The known BMW author/expert who was asked to write the E39 book declined because the commission didn't offset the large amount of work that went into writing the TWO volume manual. As a result, it took Bentley much more time to publish anything usable, and the quality of that text is for your own judgement. And we're not even talking about profits here...

If people actually paid for the book, they might've propagated better information in future publications. The consequence is that we generally get worse information. Who ultimately loses for your selfish, cheap ass ways? I do. You do. Learn that lesson now and you'll save a lot of money in maintaining and upgrading your E34 in the long run.

In observing the patterns of Bentley stealers, I've noticed a few trends: 1) they're generally newer members or members who don't often post, 2) they may not have a comprehensive understanding of the kind of community that .info nurtures. Although I do not purport to offer anything more than babblings myself, this -- meaning .info -- is one of the only opportunities in existence that I know of for individuals to acquire professional, knowledgeable, and honest answers from an industry that commonly charges $100 to listen to an owner cry, moan, and bitch. Furthermore, this is a forum that strives for excellence -- if something is wrong, it gets corrected. I challenge you to unearth another open online community on par with this.

The bottom line: support the authors and BUY THE DAMN BOOK! It costs less than a tank of gas, for christsakes.

The really bottom line: if you were foolish enough to admit pirating a bentley manual on this public forum, especially for a particularly stupid reason like "it costs too much!!!!1", the longtime members of this forum should consider why they're taking the time to respond to your posts.

best, whit

[SharkmanBMW]

On this note Lowell, have you seen and/or used a Bentley for E46? I saw there is one for years 99-01, but that's it.... and is it well done?

thanks

[stx133]

whit, in Oz the manual costs significantly more than a tank of gas, around $200, part of the reason i want to look after it.

[Paul in NZ]

i bought mine of a forum member,they arent hard to get at one time there was alink at the top of the page..you can get them from amazon for about 50 us plus postage.....

[e34it]

If anyone wants one I still have a bentley manual for e34 in pristine condition for 40 dollars shipped

[Bimmerman]

Ordered my bentley last year off amazon, got it shipped to sydney for around aus$70 all up. looking pretty scruffy these days. much preferred to an electronic copy (which i dont have) personally, for the problems i've had .info searches are my best and most accurate source of repair info, although i dont contribute much myself, i have alot of gratitude to those who do.

[dacoyote]

I agree with Whit on this, if you don't have a hard copy of the manual, then you don't have the rights to the electric version. (I think that’s what Whit is saying)

That said, I am uploading the latest copy of the manual now, if you want a copy you can pm / email me for it and I will provide you the username and password. Now.. some of you may ask... "why does Charles do that?"... it's because I have found that if it takes more then a click to steal something... then most lazy bastards prop aren’t going to do it..

I already ruined my first one working on the car before I got an electric copy... In fact I will prop buy at least one more hard copy next year.

Anyway.. that’s my 2cents on the entire thing.

-Charles

[SRR2]

Well said.

You can find the Bentley books for less than you might expect if you shop carefully. I just bought the E39 set (and have the bulging biceps to show for it) from Buy.com (I'm not necessarily recommending them, just citing them as an example) on a double-markdown deal. Occasionally they'll send out $-off or %-off coupon codes. Sometimes they'll post discount codes publicly to drum up new business. More often than not these can be stacked. The $170 list price E39 manuals cost me $78 with no tax and free shipping by the lucky confluence of a couple of these coupons.

Right now, BTW, the E34 book is $80 +ship at Amazon and $63 shipped at Buy.com

[bahnstormer]

i'm not 100% sure that they are even printing the e34 manual still
i think they've made thier run and most people are just selling off
thier lots...

they are making money on the newer books i'm pretty sure e46 etc...

[GAM]

I just got to add some things about this as food for thought. So if a person buys a book, cd, dvd, or whatever and resells it what's that? How about if he gives it to someone? How about borrowing it from the library? How about if he loans it to someone (in this case by posting it he's loaning it to everyone on the internet)? Aren't all of these actions robbing the author of potential extra revenue? The only difference between some of these actions is that the person who it's being loaned to is also making a copy for his future use. Putting it in a place where he can do a quick look at it verses having to go back to owner to look at it again. So is it really stealing?????????





Gayle was very nice about it, now I'll be the jerk.

First, let me explain that I believe that once you've bought it - ie., paid the royalties to the author/publisher - you own it and are entitled to use the information in it for personal endeavor. I own a copy of the Bentley E34 manual, for which I chucked up $51.95 shipped from Alldirect.com via Amazon about a year ago. Yes, I thought it was a lot of money to spend on an automotive book at the time. The book has paid for itself in saved time and knowledge acquisition 100x over. In my judgement, having a digital copy of a purchased book is within the limits of the copyright -- after all, even Microsoft will let software "owners" keep a backup copy of original CDs.

Second, given the amount of time and effort I'm putting into writing this message, you should assimilate that I'm disturbed by the blatantly offensive intellectual piracy occuring under our very noses. I don't know Charles Burke, editor extraordinare of aforementioned manual, but I know he spent years writing it. I know that there's a limited market for Bentley manuals, and that new ones only get written because buyers within a limited market hand over cash for them.

When people stop buying and start stealing this kind of information, the quality of future tomes is arguably worse. Case in point: The known BMW author/expert who was asked to write the E39 book declined because the commission didn't offset the large amount of work that went into writing the TWO volume manual. As a result, it took Bentley much more time to publish anything usable, and the quality of that text is for your own judgement. And we're not even talking about profits here...

If people actually paid for the book, they might've propagated better information in future publications. The consequence is that we generally get worse information. Who ultimately loses for your selfish, cheap ass ways? I do. You do. Learn that lesson now and you'll save a lot of money in maintaining and upgrading your E34 in the long run.

In observing the patterns of Bentley stealers, I've noticed a few trends: 1) they're generally newer members or members who don't often post, 2) they may not have a comprehensive understanding of the kind of community that .info nurtures. Although I do not purport to offer anything more than babblings myself, this -- meaning .info -- is one of the only opportunities in existence that I know of for individuals to acquire professional, knowledgeable, and honest answers from an industry that commonly charges $100 to listen to an owner cry, moan, and bitch. Furthermore, this is a forum that strives for excellence -- if something is wrong, it gets corrected. I challenge you to unearth another open online community on par with this.

The bottom line: support the authors and BUY THE DAMN BOOK! It costs less than a tank of gas, for christsakes.

The really bottom line: if you were foolish enough to admit pirating a bentley manual on this public forum, especially for a particularly stupid reason like "it costs too much!!!!1", the longtime members of this forum should consider why they're taking the time to respond to your posts.

best, whit

[JonE]

"My 2 Cents", hmmmmm, seems pretty cheap for such a nice wealth of information. Good idea, drive a bit less for awhile, save the tank of gas, and buy the Bentley. Only get the Bentley if you need it, though. "Borrowing" the information just doesn't seem fair, but, people have to do what their conscious' allow them to do.
Most of the best tips/tricks and furthermores I've actually been able to obtain right here on this forum.
JonE

[632 Regal]

it is not copywrite infringement if you have a paper copy, same thing with music, if you have bought the music and have it to play, an electronic copy is not illegal to have on your computer...however uploading it to whoever doesnt have an original IS illegal...something like that.

torrents are cool too.

lol

[romus]

i just paid 150 dollars for my copy the other day, if that makes you feel any better.

[romus]

btw since i own a paper copy, can anyone say where i can get an electronic copy?

[dacoyote]

btw since i own a paper copy, can anyone say where i can get an electronic copy?

I think I know where you can get one :-)

[Beez540]

If anyone wants one I still have a bentley manual for e34 in pristine condition for 40 dollars shipped


ooo... I do, I do.

I'll PM ya.

[GS535i]

Despite being one of the lowly ones that qualify under [quote "....the patterns of Bentley stealers, I've noticed a few trends: 1) they're generally newer members or members who don't often post,...." end quote], I quite agree with Gayle and Lowell.
Actually, owning a thumb print stained hard copy of Bentleys E34 manual, no sleep was lost in ripping off a pdf copy for the computer. I am still adequately 'analogue' to prefer text books, and paid several times over the cost of a Bentley for Porsche and audi WSMs ( work shop manuals); however, CDs and pdf files, etc. have their place. The massive PET6 for Porsche is only available in electronic media ... and most of the TSBs are now unavailable outside a Dealership were electronic 'clones' not prepared.
Yes, buy the text for all the good reasons given - but use the CD/pdf as its companion.

[Zeuk in Oz]

Can't help but stick my nose in - a very interesting thread Gayle - an old head on what are obviously quite young shoulders.

Firstly, to set the record straight, I don't own either the Bentley manual or the downloaded copy. I do limited work on my car and leave my mechanic to do major work due to time constraints on my part plus limited mechanical experience. I have used Bruno's site and advice from this forum extensively though.

The question Gayle has raised is a valid one but goes even further to one of what is intellectual property and who has a right to it.

There can be no debate. Unless you own a Bentley manual, use of the electronic version is theft - pure and simple. It doesn't matter whether you can't afford the Bentley, or it is difficult to get, or its dearer in one country compared with another, or the baby is teething, or you weren't breast fed, or you don't have time. It is still theft.

I realise that this is an old-fashioned point of view, but if I had written the manual I would be fuming about an electronic version being available for download for free.

The question of libraries and second hand copies is not an issue as "ownership" is restricted to the current holder. It is like a comparison of apples and oranges.

If you can't afford to buy a copy, but it is the only thing that will keep your car on the road, sell the car and buy something less complicated - like a pushbike !

Some of us are old enough to remember the days before pirated CDs, DVDs, computer operating systems, computer games etc etc. Pirating probably started in a big way with cassette tapes copying vinyl records in the 70s by my generation. I can still remember when photocopying was regulated for the same reason.

Unlawful copying and distribution is dishonest and will result (no doubt has resulted) in fewer original works in whatever field It has now escalated to amazing proportions with the internet.

Minds much greater than mine have not found a way to solve the problem so I cannot offer a solution. That doesn't mean it isn't dishonest or immoral. I can also foresee a time when originals will become far more expensive and restricted.

Personally I feel that it has come about with the change of culture seen over the past 30 odd years. The notion of saving up and waiting to buy something when you could afford it has been replaced by "I must have it now, by any means possible". Just because "everybody else does it" doesn't make it right.

This is not criticism, rather the random ramblings of an old, deranged mind. My generation also has to shoulder much of the responsibility for the mindset of the current generation of teenagers and young adults in respect of this matter and many others.

This question of intellectual property theft is one that as a parent of teenagers I have to address regularly and it is a struggle in the current climate.

Do not fear, my prehistoric attitudes will die with me ! I did not write this to criticise others, but felt it must be said and congratulate Gayle for having a conscience.

[Kalevera]

I just got to add some things about this as food for thought. So if a person buys a book, cd, dvd, or whatever and resells it what's that? How about if he gives it to someone? How about borrowing it from the library? How about if he loans it to someone (in this case by posting it he's loaning it to everyone on the internet)? Aren't all of these actions robbing the author of potential extra revenue? The only difference between some of these actions is that the person who it's being loaned to is also making a copy for his future use. Putting it in a place where he can do a quick look at it verses having to go back to owner to look at it again. So is it really stealing?????????
A secondhand purchaser is effectively acquiring the license, at an agreed price, from the original owner. The original owner relinquishes any title to the information.

A library lends a hard copy (be it digitally on a CD or in bound format) and expects the same to be returned; they are effectively entrusting the borrower with the license for a period of time and every other potential borrower or reader loses the ability to use that license during that time. I'm not going to get into a discussion on the semantics of library lending and whether libraries violate copyright terms beyond mentioning the existence of the typical garbage found with most replicable media, offered for sale or loan: unless the distributor/copyright holder is a bonehead, they claim that the license can be used for personal use only and cannot be exhibited to an audience. I'm sure the corollary is easily seen regarding how PDFing, mass distributing, or receiving material such as a Bentley manual under similar circumstance is a less than honest practice.


best, whit

[Randell]

i didn't even know you could download it, i'll have to get a copy to print out the page that i ripped out of my $155 paper version when i drove over it with wet tires!

[Gayle]

i didn't even know you could download it, i'll have to get a copy to print out the page that i ripped out of my $155 paper version when i drove over it with wet tires!


I can only imagine what you said when that happened ;)

[wingman]

I'm a full member of APRA (Australasian Performing Right Association). In my previous, okay dormant, life as a song writer I used to get upset about missing out on royalties. Now in my current life as a cop I get upset when someone else gets offered the overtime and not me. No difference really...

[Zeuk in Oz]

This topic is so important it deserves to stay on the first page a bit longer. :D

[genphreak]

I don't believe in ripping anyone off. Especially authors and artists. That is something I have always left up to record labels and production companies :D

The problem is mainly, what do you do when such work is not available the way you need it?

For example; A blind person that cannot get a book in braille, are they allowed to make one? Perhaps if they own a copy? No, they are sure as hell cannot. Nor may they employ someone to translate a movie or audio recording they can't hear.

Not more than a few years ago you couldn't get pdfs movies. A downloadable Bentley or ETK was a dream. Thankfully that has changed, as I hate having to own books and lug them around, I guess I'm one of these 'weird people' that likes searchable, electronic documents that can be read on-screen.

The problem for people like me is that publishers (not the writers) have never done anything to help address the market. I am prepared to pay for these luxuries, yet they ignore and frustrate a market they 'see no way to make money from'. I believe it is more than this sentiment or some fetish to do with forcing everyone to spend our time leafing through pages of poorly bound books.

Technologists have been left to live 'in the academic dark' for ages as encouraging electronic distribution 'threatens' their copyrights. Our books (adorning the shelves of every IT professional are ALL landfill within 5 years as the software they describe is often outdated before they go to print). Why should they ever have been printed?

Wheras students continue to fight over ragged old books in libraries. All this could be available online to anyone that needs it when they need it (paid or otherwise).

It is simply a massive waste; ponder for a moment that if we had put some effort in this decade, we could have almost all of mankind's knowledge databased and made available online by now.

Indeed the case of all the large publishing and media companies is not black and white. These entities could have been working with their customers instead of taking them to court (http://www.eff.org/share/), as they are now doing the world over.

They have been complicit by their actions and inactions in this 'IP war'. The fact is that they have far more resources than any of the brilliant minds behind the introdction of popular peer to peer file-sharing mechanisms, yet they never once bothered to even start a trial service (as or before the Internet became of age). Thousands of consumers have been asking them for years, can I buy this electronically? Yet the answer is always no.

It took Maverick arrogance of Steve Jobs to build iTunes online music store the world's most successful media delivery system. And this is not even his thing, he is a computer manufactuter, not a distribution demon. He just had the balls to go up against these people who were busy plotting against their customers instead of doing the right thing.

They are still logging downloaders for court action in many years' time.

The reason is, (the problem really) is they never wanted to do anything about it. In fact, they committed just as bad a crime (if not worse) in that they completely ignored all the ways possible to provide a cheap and fast distribution system that could help get the information (locked up in all those books) out to all the people that need it. They worked actively to prevent it, why... just to save 'some short-term profits? They were scared perhaps?

Uh-uh. I am afriad not. They had billions of dollars of marketing resources, not just technologists and developers in their employ. Instead they chose to lay in wait, plotted to destroy Napster by causing a shocking winner takes all legal battle,

They could have just bought it. Instead they gave truckloads of money to lawyers (for doing nothing but destroying what a few, talented and creative individuals spent their lives living and breathing). Do not forget that they destroyed the lives of a great many people in the process. Napster could have been iTunes, but they killed it.

Even when they finally owned it, all their million dollar marketing geniuses were not given any teeth to take advantage of a market that was staring others in the face. They were still waiting. They wanted every technology they could steal with their jubilant army of lawyers. They were not just rich, influential and successful. They wanted more, they wanted what we all want: They wanted the law to enshrine their future. And as long as people keep buying the CDs adn DVDs that deliver massive profits to them and little to teh artists, they do not miss out while they wait to change the law.

Thus they turned Napster into an online Frankenstein and flushed it down the tubes along with Sony's profits. Today it remains a mirage to what it could have been.

Sony, unlike the others, was really stupid however. They never thought that anyone could threaten their ascendancy in the portable audio market. Were the days of the Walkman over? No-doubt the thought so, their offerings were old, limited and dated so much that a few pieces of silicon made in China could do better.

Their share-holders were asleep at the wheel. They did not sack the clowns running the circus in time to prevent a major tent collapse. They were all too busy taking dividends from all their poor artists to worry about the fact that people really want to share Intellectual Property. Sony has lost millions in this market, yet it is market it knew better than anyone. They created Walkman and built it into the fad the iPod is now. They know how to do these things well, they are not this stupid normally. Seasoned by many decades and battles, Sony has seen it all before. They fought the content providers (and won) in 1981. They were threatened by Hollywood studios who were worried about losing their movie ticket sales to the hordes keenly recording movies at home on their new VHS and Betamax VCRs.

They fought Hollywood and won. They did so well they bought Warner Bros.

Now they defend the same thinking from the other side. But are they making such serious mistakes? Sure they missed the iPod, they missed the DVD, LCD, PC and plasma screen markets too. But is this so damaging?

It sure won't be if we allow them to turn the tables and line their lawyers pockets: Apparently we're happy to have our downloads monitored for terrorist content nad on the back of that we are OK with Sony's filesharing checks. They can kick our doors in if they want, but now they have one the right to eavesdrop on our privacy using cheap computer power instead. Soon summons' may be issued as form letters from computers with no real evidence check. At present 25,000 people in the US have been threatened like this.

These corporations now access our ISP's systems to monitor and log our data for signs of copyright abuse. Are they (or the crime lords that will be stealing the information they are logging really doing all this 'for the public good'?) Will they never use it to influence elections? Currently they use it to terrorise technologically illiterate people into quick legal wins, but will it be more than a generation before they use this to come down on us for 'crimes against the state' when all we were doing was talking about our toothbrush?

All the while, the corporations keep making thousands of tonnes of plastic disposable media, packaging and carting it around the world to sell for (in many countries) exorbitant prices. Remember that in the West we have lots of money and can afford discs and books. Most of the world can't, let alone the prices these companies ask.

So instead of getting ready to sell IP online 10 years ago, their wisdom chose to direct all this investment into an account their lawyers to use from 2003. Funding the legal destruction of 12 year old children and their (often poor and) ignorant parents, they continue this quest unrelented today.

In some cases these kids were just using the music player they were encouraged to buy (or in some cases were given) by some other large coporporation/s (some are given away on the back of cereal packets).

If you ask me persecuting kids like this should be a crime.

Of course it is no wonder this is going on. The real question is, with a resource like the Internet available to almost everyone and able to do so much good by spreading centuries of our knowledge, why are we allowing such morally corrupt commercial interests to prevent what is one of the very few rays of light in mankind's future?

The Internet held so much promise, but it suffers abuse from people and their desire for bloat of porn and commercial desires, from politicians (who like others in control) see it as too dangerous a tool for the people to have unfettered access to. We are destroying what was one of the best communication tools we have made since the slate, yet we care more about IP.

However IP abuse is, of course, a symptom of our greed. So too are it's founding laws in the newly connected world. All such laws are a balance, which is why Sony won us the ability for us to copy TV and movies with the crumby video recorders it sold us (for personal use). This reasoning does not exist in modern laws, and you guessd it, they were the ones to help overturn it.

IP law must be revisited, as it stands in the way of sense on both sides. How much authors in Africa, India or China make when they sell a book to their children? Where books sell for a dollar or two, wny must we insist that they pay 20 times as much for our knowledge? No wonder they see no problem copying it. The prices we demand is an insult to them, literally.

In the absense of sensible legislation, when I write my books, they will distributed free so people can read them and make use of the effort I put in!

But as long as the staus quo remains, we will all lose for many aspiring great authors may not make the effort. Due to an absense of any return due to unintelligent copyright law or greedy publishers, they are far less likely to afford so much effort in contributing knowledge to society. Forever artists and authors may remain unable to make a living- as they no longer able to influence the law makers as much as other interests have become so adeptly clever at doing.

Ultimately the Internet should be used to address these imbalances so mankind all do better. We need law framed to allow it. At present our IP law exists for only influential people, organised crime and leeching lawyers and corporations that influence them.

Of course, whether it changes is up to us.

[bullyd]

i feel i gotta say that i downloaded the pdf from the link that was posted on here a month or so ago and got eyeball ache trying to read through it,but realised how much this book was a MUST, and so ordered my hard copy about a week ago (not arrived yet) so, in my case the 'stolen' pdf version actually made a sale!

[genphreak]

i feel i gotta say that i downloaded the pdf from the link that was posted on here a month or so ago and got eyeball ache trying to read through it,but realised how much this book was a MUST, and so ordered my hard copy about a week ago (not arrived yet) so, in my case the 'stolen' pdf version actually made a sale!This is about 50% of the reason the content providers are so happy to do nothing except log the 'infringements' and then sue everyone later on.

Sharing often encourages sales to those that can afford it, and loses no sales to those that can't...

[Gayle]

genphreak

Really interesting post--food for thought. How long did it take you to write that? I always appreciate your thoughtful and articulate posts.

So I get what you are saying about the dig in their heels mind set of corporations and the need to embrace electronic formats.

I can't tell if Whit's original concern would be addressed under that system.--That concern is that if authors are not adequately compensated, that the quality of future knowledge will deteriorate. I know that other people who have posted to this thread said I downloaded and then I bought. But how do you see authors getting compensated in your system?

While you would make the books you write free, I would not. I understand some books are written out of passion. It is a self expression that has to be honored. There are others who have knowledge that could be shared who are not driven by passion. I have about 2 books inside me that I could write. I have friends that have written books. I would not be willing to give up every free moment for a year if I were not going to get financial compensation. If books are sold for $2, will authors get adequately compensated so they remain motivated to write?

[Zeuk in Oz]

Excellent contribution, Genphreak, wow.
You obviously have thought a lot about this problem and know more about the issues than most.
As I was reading it I thought, this is it, my concerns and questions will be answered.
Then I realised what you are saying is that self-interest on everyone's part precludes a solution to the problem of intellectual property on the net.
Perhaps just as the internet has been so revolutionary, we now need just as revolutionary "laws" or "rules" or "guidelines" to administer it.
So far I don't understand how this is possible but perhaps I, not having great knowledge of the issues, am still thinking within the square and what is needed is someone like you to come up with a solution by thinking outside the square.
Thank you for your thoughts.

[callen]

Demand for Bentley's may not be shrinking....maybe quite the opposite. When a new car comes out almost none of the owners are DIY...as the cars age and folks that buy them can't afford to take them to dealer for maint. and they are out of warrantee that's when sales take off. Not sure if the E34 manual is at it's peak now or just past.....sure demand mirrors Bell Shaped Curve.....I do don't make copies of CD's especially from artists and would rather buy someone a CD to ensure artist get their due for something that is of big value to me......Pearl Jam...as well as a Bentley...this company makes owning a E34 & E32 much more enjoyable and thus should be compensated.

[callen]

Exactly...thanks!

[callen]

I on the other hand don't mind getting black nasty grease on the pages.....helps me find sections I continuously use....and after a few years adds a very asthetically pleasing patina...(-:

Have an old Chilton GM manual 71-76 I've owned for many many years and would use grease marks to find my sections....76 cutlass and 71 Chevy...very useful.

[callen]

Rubbish! .....comes down to if someone makes something and you want it buy it....if not..... don't. You can't justify "taking" something.

This thread is about Bentley Manuals....who created something no one else wanted to invest in....if cheap bastards steal this information they will not in the future want to create it...and if that means printing on paper so be it. Understand media corps. will get what they can...that's free enterprise but not a reason take it for free.

Justify it anyway you want but if you take and don't pay it's stealing...period.

[uscharalph]

i feel i gotta say that i downloaded the pdf from the link that was posted on here a month or so ago and got eyeball ache trying to read through it,but realised how much this book was a MUST, and so ordered my hard copy about a week ago (not arrived yet) so, in my case the 'stolen' pdf version actually made a sale!
He's got a point there!

[uscharalph]

He's got a point there!
But I guess it should be up to the publisher to make that kind of promotion.

[Bill R.]

bentley goes i bought a new paper edition back when i got my car and have downloaded the electronic version but don't ever use it since its a pain to use anyway. But that said i have no qualms about paying independent parties for info such as Bentley or Brett A. for his m3 repair cd etc.... The one that i do have a problem with is the factory service manual costs from the dealers such as the 450 that i paid for the factory service manuals on cd from bmw covering the older models before 94 or the 112 that i paid for a new tis from bmw or the techdoc cd for the 98-2000 models that was 280 or the etm that was 154... the only one that i consider to be a realistic price was the 40 bucks that i paid for a new etk from bmw. With these prices its no wonder that copies flourish on ebay. As i said i can understand independent publishers making a profit but is it really necessary for the automakers to make such a profit on service info for the purchaser? Especially when a number of automakers supply the information for free or very reasonably priced... All the korean manufacturers were putting their factory service manuals on the net for free until recently when some of them decided to start charging for that info.
Also along the same lines i own a tivo and record certain programs on a regular basis , its completely legal to do this, now since this is legal to record the show "house" for example and i've recorded the entire season. Now they have released the entire season on dvd and you can rent it. So if I already have a recorded version of it on dvd from my tivo, does this mean that its ok to copy the dvd release that you rent from the video store of a television series? Or is this piracy?







Let me profess my partial innocence before I profess my guilt. My car came with a Bentley as I bought Charlie from an enthusiast. I rationalized that because I wasn't robbing the author of a sale when I down loaded a pdf copy, because I wouldn't be buying one anyway.

I have been complicit in trying to help others get one, like last summer I tried to email a copy to that poor woman in the carribean with the overheating problems and no bmw mechanics because she had so few resources. The fact that it didn't go through doesn't change the fact that I tried to rob the author. I have been complicit in the current Bentley binge in ways I don't care to admit.

How many e34s are there on the road? They die every day. How many potential buyers are there for Bentley manuals? The number of potential customers is constantly shrinking due to the diminishing number of e34s and due to all of us who get them free. I had a stats professor in grad school who wrote his own textbook. He concluded at the end that he made minimum wage for his efforts because it took sooooo much time and he sold so few copies because the publisher wouldn't go for a second edition. Minimum wage is probably what this guy is going to get because we are all ripping him off.

I know that free downloads are part of the culture with music and movies, but I don't do it there cause I know if artists don't make money they won't make music or movies. Is the Bentley going to go out of print cause it isn't making any money?

I am wishing there was some way to make it right to this guy. Think we can have a bake sale and raise $40-50 for each copy we have pirated? Anyone have a serious idea about something that could be done to make it right?

I am not trying to make anyone feel bad. I am not pointing any fingers. I hope I am not alienating my friends on this board. I just think it is time that this point of view was expressed. I just kept waiting for someone else to do it. Any those of you who know how I participated in this current round can silently condem me for being a hypocrite and a flip-flopper. I deserve it.

[uscharalph]

"Also along the same lines i own a tivo and record certain programs on a regular basis , its completely legal to do this, now since this is legal to record the show "house" for example and i've recorded the entire season. Now they have released the entire season on dvd and you can rent it. So if I already have a recorded version of it on dvd from my tivo, does this mean that its ok to copy the dvd release that you rent from the video store of a television series? Or is this piracy?"

Thaty's probably piracy, Bill, since they probably have extra content on the DVD.

[Kalevera]

Bill, you do know about Central Letter, yes? I'm not insinuating that their prices are anything to be happy about ($17,000 GT1, anybody?!), but I think it's comparable to what the dealer gets charged, which makes a lot of sense given the situation.

There's some very interesting legislation going through our bureaucracy at the moment;I only learned of it recently, but I guess it's been going on for a few years. That is the demands of aftermarket parts manufacturers, independents, and the like lobbying Washington for legalese that requires the major automotive manufacturers to release all knowledge, proprietary or otherwise, regarding a product: all of the standard material we have (DIS/training systems and software) and ADDITIONALLY items such as control module diagrams and information. Such a law raises some interesting points:

1) In theory, it should help competition. Independent repair facilities accrue better knowledge (not that they don't have better knowledge over dealer techs to begin with), parts and service get cheaper with increased supply.

2) The people I associate with in the industry do not support such legislation because it is believed that communistically releasing proprietary information, which is arguably wrong to begin with, will result in China/other emerging manufacturing states with limited quality control selling subpar "proprietary" parts, which will ultimately lessen the vehicle's general reliablility and people's regard for the marque.

In response to this debate, BMW and other european car manufacturers agreed to voluntarily release such information (versus having it legislatively taken from them). This occured about three years ago. You may see copies of BMW TechDrive, the company's relatively new publication for independent garages, sitting on the parts counter of your local dealer (quality of that publication until the last issue is arguable, as well).



Back on topic: I think people are confusing the point of the thread. My (and I think Gayle's) intention was not to spark a debate regarding copyright issues between digital and physical assets, as Nick spent much time and effort discussing: as previously stated, I do not believe that publishers deem it illegal for the owner of a paper (or digital) text to have an additional copy in the alternative format.

They are selling a personal license, that gives one the right to enjoy the use of that information. It's the same information, whether it be on a screen or in a book, and hopefully, you still bought it.

best, whit

[tdgard]

No guilt here

I own a manual for every BMW I have bought that Bentley provides a manual for.

E34
E28
E46

I have owned several more that the Bentley doesn’t provide for.

With that said, it has always been common practice for me to make photocopies of relevant pages when working on my car. This not only makes it convenient to take under the car with me, I also don't have to deal with spilt fluids on my $50 book.


Software companies allow you to make a backup copy of everything you have bought from them. I have all the originals of my CDs in a safe and work off the copies. I would think that a scanned copy of a book would be a reasonable parallel.



The only reason I think the publisher would have an objection (as long as you own a legal copy of the manual) is the fact that someone did not copy their own physical book. This would seem trite to me and also very difficult to prove.


I do know that not owning the book and just obtaining it off the net is downright stealing.

[Gayle]

My guilt was for trying to help some people who had not bought it get it without buying it. I started this thread to point out that downloading without buying is stealing.

I am pleased to see so many people say they have a purchased copy before downloading and have not engaged in piracy.

[tdgard]

Quite sorry Gayle.

I think that after reading through all these posts I lost track of what the initial post was.

Downloading something you have not purchased and is available from the creator is stealing--plain and simple.

If I create content and then make it available on the net (or anywhere else) for free--have at it.

If I want to charge you, then finding it for free somewhere else is theft.

It all boils down to intellectual property. Designs, concepts and everything in-between are the property of the creator. If that creator is willing to share for free then you can have it. If not, well then you have to pay.

With that said, I do feel you can (and should) backup all important items.

If Bentley were to offer a PDF or equivalent of the manuals for a fee, I would feel a lot more guilty about downloading. But since that is not available, I have no guilt about taking the work of others that are offering this manual (which I own) for free.

edited to remove a wayward "not"

[Gayle]

Quite sorry Gayle.


If Bentley were to offer a PDF or equivalent of the manuals for a fee, I would feel a lot more guilty about downloading. But since that is not available, I have no guilt about taking the work of others that are offering this manual (which I own) for free.


I think there is a pretty strong consensus about that. If you have bought one, download away.

[genphreak]

It took about 2 hours actually. I didn't set out to make it so lengthy... (Sorry everyone- for the length and the obvious rants)

To answer your questions Gayle, I'd make my books free for simplicity in publication: There is no need to make physcial copies which costs a lot just to prepare, let alone print.

I don't see a (long term) deterioration of quality becuase people stop opting to buy books. The only reason we have VHS and Beta, DVD, CD and to a lesser extent books is because they (were) the best way for us to deliver things. As soon as one can avoid printing and distributing/selling the physical media, the costs are gone. If an author gets royalty payments of 1-3% on a book, they'd be doing well under the current system. I don't think that's much to write home about unless you only want to write best-sellers.

I'd rarther share the knowledge and build mechanisms to maintain and manage the additional knoweledge others might contribute afterwards, something books are very bad at fostering.

Electronically we can keep a book relevant by updating it where and when we need to. We can also link our audience to a vast bibliography and endless related resources available via the web. Why a traditional author would not want to build relationships with their readers I don't know.

I don't think many authors other than novel writers actually write books for the money. If the temporary loss of retail book sales stops money hungry authors pumping formula books out (Haynes manuals are often so bad they are a good example). If they do, then roll-over for those rare enthusiasts who will do it completely free, just for the fame or to link customers with the knowledge to a marketing channel which makes money through relationships or other activities.

Some people prefer spoken books even, all this can be provided online for almost nothing (but vast opportunities to do much better things with the knowledge sharing process) :) Nick

[mattyb]

very much agreed!