Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
chill out! he didnt link to it, he didnt spoil it. he even tactfully chose to use the picture of the first page only in the article- this giving away NOTHING!
At the very least he WARNED you that someone ELSE out there may indeed spoil it for you by broadcasting the ending they learned from the leaked version.
if you search out the site on google and download it and ruin it for yourself then shame on you. i assume that we are adults capable of exercising a little will power.
You have provided a circumvention of copyright protection, and therefore have exposed salon.com to legal liability by providing this information....
OUCH!
Let's calm the hysteria a little bit people. That the book was leaked is news. Almost anything that happens with the book is news. That the book was leaked and turned into .pdfs and put on bittorrent where it can't be removed is technology news.
I am one of the people trying to make sure that not to read any spoilers before friday midnight, but this article in no way made that more difficult for me. I'd still have to go search for, download and then read the book for anything to be ruined! There is no threat here.
How to you justify downloading the leak? Is it because you're a journalist so it's OK? I'm pretty sure that if you were to post a direct link to the leak on Salon there would be legal ramifications, right? While you were downloading through Bittorrent others were downloading the file from you (that is the nature of Bittorrent). Probably something that you should have warned your readers of (so they are aware they could be sued).
Yes, readers can stay away.
This is about authors and publishers whose rights get violated. Doesn't matter if the author is someone as wildly successful as Rowling. Wrong is wrong.
Is this newsworthy? Even if it is, a story on illegal filesharing did not need to actually mention the name of the site - that makes me suspicious of Manjoo's intentions. Oh yes, of course, he didn't do anything illegal - he didn't link, after all.
I don't care-- like I personally am not angry about you posting this, or talking about downloading illegally-- but I am surprised you would admit to illegal file sharing on a public website. Aren't you a little scared of getting in trouble?
I just read the anonymous letter with the subject chilllll. That writer makes a good point. Knowing that the book is out there is a warning. Now we know that if we hear someone claiming to know what happens in the book they may be telling the truth, whereas before we found out about this leak it was almost certainly just idle speculation.
I think it could be argued that he did something illegal. Had he downloaded the leak through a conventional method (ie one way) there probably wouldn't be a problem. But as I said earlier, when you download through bittorrent you are at the same time also distributing the file to others.
If you read my piece carefully, you'll see I didn't have to use BT to get it. I got a PDF from a Web site that was linked on The Pirate Bay.
My article contains no DMCA-prohibited circumvention device.
"But as you'll notice, I didn't post any of it," you say.
But in fact, you did post several sentences. Nothing significant, nothing that would give away any of the plot -- but you did post some of it. Why should we be surprised that you're so unfamiliar with basic morality? Heck, you don't even recognize a bald-faced lie when you tell one.
Keith,
Get a grip, man. Those sentences told us nothing without their context AND had a warning before them. 'Unfamiliar with basic morality' for reporting on the news? That's exactly the line Bush uses to say that journalists are helping the terrorists.
Aside from the legal issues, which I admit may be considerable, how will reading the book "spoil" it?
If you picked up your Harry Potter at midnight this Friday and began to read it, would it have "spoiled" the book for the millions of people who didn't get theirs until Fedex delivered their copies from Amazon? How about those who were forced to wait six months longer until they could check out a copy from the library?
If you read a bootleg copy a few days before the official release, how will reading it early "spoil" the book for you?
Now, I can understand feeling some annoyance if someone were to tell you crucial plot details, like The Ending, before you had a chance to read it for yourself. But, if you skip right to the final chapter of your own legitimate book when you receive it through normal channels and read the ending, have you "spoiled" the book? Is it somehow no longer worth reading?
If I had my hands on a copy of Deathly Hallows at this moment, I would read it. Maybe I'm just spoiled.
I beg to differ with ALL of you who have said that Manjoo did not spoil anything for anyone. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it. It was quite clear in the previous HP book if two people are going to die, then Snape needs to go way at the top of the "most likely to take a dirt nap" list. And now we know (90% certain, unless the quote was from a flashback) he at least makes it 90% of the way through the book. That stinks. So as I read Deathly Hollows, any time Snape is in danger before page 680-something, I can feel relatively certain that he'll make it out alive.
That's a spoiler. And that's crappy.
Some of us don't only read books to find out what happens next. I like the Potter books in part for its sturdy prose. Also for it's more honest depiction of orphans (I am one; if iPhone lady can share so can I) than in the horribly navel-gazing "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius." My point is, who's really shortchanging the books here? If all you care about is what happens next, then why even bother reading the book? Why not just find a synopsis Monday morning so that you don't have to waste time reading and you can go straight to finding out what happens next?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
