Topic: What is up with these book prices?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #11,656
Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #209,984
It seems the book costs around $20.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 51 seconds later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,986
@previous (Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA)
Paperback new is cheaper than used new which is in turn cheaper than a virtual copy.
Paperback new is cheaper than used new which is in turn cheaper than a virtual copy.
dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,991
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,992
@previous (dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46)
I have books that are over 150 years old, so that argument isn't a great argument.
I have books that are over 150 years old, so that argument isn't a great argument.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,994
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 45 seconds later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,995
dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,996
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 53 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #209,997
@previous (dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46)
Not really, but they were made quite well back then. Also they spent most of their time in bookshelves.
Not really, but they were made quite well back then. Also they spent most of their time in bookshelves.
Bookshelf !hbZVTk6JYc joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 30 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #210,000
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #210,001
Voice of !WisdomHsuU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,002
> paying for PDF files
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,003
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,004
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,006
@210,002 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
Why you always niggering software, music and books? I know black folks that steal way less than you. They don't consider it stealing either, but you're way more prolific. For shame!
Why you always niggering software, music and books? I know black folks that steal way less than you. They don't consider it stealing either, but you're way more prolific. For shame!
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,007
@210,003 (A)
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3234667/The_Anarchist_s_Cookbook
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5183654/Vladimir_Nabokov_-_Lolita
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3234667/The_Anarchist_s_Cookbook
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5183654/Vladimir_Nabokov_-_Lolita
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 33 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,008
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,011
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,015
@previous (G)
Yeah, if I want to make smokebombs and firecrackers i'll... Hell, I'll just buy 'em. This is america after all.
And, no... Napalm and chlorine gas do not make one hardcore.
Yeah, if I want to make smokebombs and firecrackers i'll... Hell, I'll just buy 'em. This is america after all.
And, no... Napalm and chlorine gas do not make one hardcore.
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,018
@previous (E)
most of the formulas are bad and can easily cause mortal or fatal harm if attempted. its usually only idiot teenagers who take that shit seriously anyway
most of the formulas are bad and can easily cause mortal or fatal harm if attempted. its usually only idiot teenagers who take that shit seriously anyway
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,020
@210,006 (E)
> calling copyright-infringement "stealing"
You have revealed yourself as being an unreasonable cunt that is not worth my time. Thank you.
@210,008 (A)
You left out the title of the book and expect me to guess which book you want to get. Seeing how suspicious you are being, it's only logical to believe that you want a controversial book.
> calling copyright-infringement "stealing"
You have revealed yourself as being an unreasonable cunt that is not worth my time. Thank you.
@210,008 (A)
You left out the title of the book and expect me to guess which book you want to get. Seeing how suspicious you are being, it's only logical to believe that you want a controversial book.
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,021
Can't burn a kindle when your cold.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,023
@210,004 (A)
http://ramgarlic.net/ebooks/pro-git-chacon.pdf
I'm not a lazy faggot like voice of wisdom so I delivered.
http://ramgarlic.net/ebooks/pro-git-chacon.pdf
I'm not a lazy faggot like voice of wisdom so I delivered.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,024
@210,020 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
I posted the name of the book 18 seconds after the initial post, because I then realized I didn't post the book name in the OP.
I posted the name of the book 18 seconds after the initial post, because I then realized I didn't post the book name in the OP.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 44 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,026
@210,020 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
> calling theft not-theft
I see what you did there. How very black of you.
> calling theft not-theft
I see what you did there. How very black of you.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,035
@210,024 (A)
> I posted the name of the book 18 seconds after the initial post
> Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 1 hour ago, 5 minutes later
Sure you did.
> I posted the name of the book 18 seconds after the initial post
> Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 1 hour ago, 5 minutes later
Sure you did.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU double-posted this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,037
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,039
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,043
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,046
@210,039 (A)
> double-posts instead of editing
> tells ME to grow a brain
@previous (E)
REMINDER: the implication that copyright-infringement for PERSONAL use is somehow a form of stealing is a fallacy in and of itself.
> double-posts instead of editing
> tells ME to grow a brain
@previous (E)
REMINDER: the implication that copyright-infringement for PERSONAL use is somehow a form of stealing is a fallacy in and of itself.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,050
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
I believe @210,035 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU) and @210,037 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU) are a double post, you fucking retard.
I believe @210,035 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU) and @210,037 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU) are a double post, you fucking retard.
Anonymous E double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,053
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #210,055
@210,050 (E)
@previous (E)
Irony.
@210,050 (E)
Yes, but mine was simply two posts by me after each other, while the OP posts and rather than using the "edit" button, posts an elaboration or similar immediately right after the 1st.
@previous (E)
Media piracy is not theft; it is copyright infringement.
@previous (E)
Irony.
@210,050 (E)
Yes, but mine was simply two posts by me after each other, while the OP posts and rather than using the "edit" button, posts an elaboration or similar immediately right after the 1st.
@previous (E)
Media piracy is not theft; it is copyright infringement.
(Edited 59 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 28 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,075
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
It's theft, plain and simple. Same as stealing a book or dvd from the store.
It's theft, plain and simple. Same as stealing a book or dvd from the store.
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,080
@previous (E)
Copyright infringement does not refer to actual theft, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.
You lose.
Copyright infringement does not refer to actual theft, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.
You lose.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,102
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
Doesn't apply when it's theft, bud. Stealing like a nigger is theft. Just cause you're stealing like a smart nigger doesn't not make it theft, you buffoon.
Doesn't apply when it's theft, bud. Stealing like a nigger is theft. Just cause you're stealing like a smart nigger doesn't not make it theft, you buffoon.
Falco !PZmcClOUDk joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,271
& WHATS THE DEAL WITH AIRLINE FOOD??
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 10 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,429
@210,102 (E)
Copying is not theft. Theft involves removal of the original material. Copying leaves the original intact. While it is possible the copyright holder may be damaged by this activity, that fact alone isn't about to rewrite the laws of physics. Copying does not remove the original and therefore cannot be considered theft in any objective analysis of reality.
Please keep your irrational beliefs out of the discussion.
Copying is not theft. Theft involves removal of the original material. Copying leaves the original intact. While it is possible the copyright holder may be damaged by this activity, that fact alone isn't about to rewrite the laws of physics. Copying does not remove the original and therefore cannot be considered theft in any objective analysis of reality.
Please keep your irrational beliefs out of the discussion.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,457
@previous (K)
Lol, you can call it whatever you want to, it's dishonest, it's theft, and it's wrong. What I don't gey is why people can't just say, "yeah, I know it's wrong, but fuck you -i don't care."
Instead you want to defend it, redefine it, and that somehow makes you Robin Hood, or a noble pirate. Fuck off, just be a theif and own up to your actions. I can respect people who violate laws and are dishonest. But I have a hard time resecting anyone who just makes retarded excuses to justify what they do.
Piracy is identical to stealing off the shelf, and your little diatribe about "removing the original" is merely an empty argument. It doean't change the fact that piracy for personal use is theft, and is morally wrong.
Quit being a faggot and pretending you've found a loophole. You're just a theif.
Lol, you can call it whatever you want to, it's dishonest, it's theft, and it's wrong. What I don't gey is why people can't just say, "yeah, I know it's wrong, but fuck you -i don't care."
Instead you want to defend it, redefine it, and that somehow makes you Robin Hood, or a noble pirate. Fuck off, just be a theif and own up to your actions. I can respect people who violate laws and are dishonest. But I have a hard time resecting anyone who just makes retarded excuses to justify what they do.
Piracy is identical to stealing off the shelf, and your little diatribe about "removing the original" is merely an empty argument. It doean't change the fact that piracy for personal use is theft, and is morally wrong.
Quit being a faggot and pretending you've found a loophole. You're just a theif.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,460
It's not theft, but rather Copyright Infringement. However, that doesn't make it any less wrong. Nevertheless, I don't care about how wrong it is, fuck you - I don't care.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,469
For fuck sake. Saying piracy isn't theft because piracy doesn't physically remove something is as dumb as saying that gay marriage isn't marriage because marriage is only between a man and a woman.
SQUARED :3 !L.....AlN. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,473
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 17 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,480
@210,469 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
It's a legitimate distinction between objective and subjective realities. In your subjective reality, and possibly even in our collective subjective reality, it damages the original creator in some way. But in objective reality it cannot possibly be stealing because the original is left unaffected.
I simply don't submit to the same brainwashing as you. I don't believe creators are harmed when their creations are enjoyed by others.
It's a legitimate distinction between objective and subjective realities. In your subjective reality, and possibly even in our collective subjective reality, it damages the original creator in some way. But in objective reality it cannot possibly be stealing because the original is left unaffected.
I simply don't submit to the same brainwashing as you. I don't believe creators are harmed when their creations are enjoyed by others.
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,490
I just pirate all my ebooks. Demonoid has a nice collection.
dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,492
brie !OudrPWaUDQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,493
@previous (dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46)
a retarded one, lol.
i don't understand how anyone could be so thick as to seriously believe that downloading a pirate copy of a file is equivalent to theft. we have more than one word that you can use to describe situations, so stop trying to use the wrong fucking word. it's like they are insisting on cramming the square peg into the round hole because they just can't see the difference.
If you are equating piracy to theft, you're either a fucking moron or you're trolling.
a retarded one, lol.
i don't understand how anyone could be so thick as to seriously believe that downloading a pirate copy of a file is equivalent to theft. we have more than one word that you can use to describe situations, so stop trying to use the wrong fucking word. it's like they are insisting on cramming the square peg into the round hole because they just can't see the difference.
If you are equating piracy to theft, you're either a fucking moron or you're trolling.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,494
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,506
So why not take it from a store?
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 34 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,524
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,553
@previous (I)
Caught stealing? Yeah, downloading is a much safer way to steal and not get caught. I mean, if you're going to nigger something, at least do it so you won't get caught and charged with a crime.
Caught stealing? Yeah, downloading is a much safer way to steal and not get caught. I mean, if you're going to nigger something, at least do it so you won't get caught and charged with a crime.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,560
@210,506 (E)
Again, still not getting the point. Taking it from a store removes the original, hence it's stealing. Copying leaves the original, hence it's not stealing.
Again, still not getting the point. Taking it from a store removes the original, hence it's stealing. Copying leaves the original, hence it's not stealing.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,562
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,563
@210,560 (K)
So it's cool to sneak into a movie theater and watch movies without paying? Or is that theft of services?
So it's cool to sneak into a movie theater and watch movies without paying? Or is that theft of services?
Anonymous E double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,564
Ooh, or sneaking into a football game without a ticket! Or stowing away in the wheel well of an airplane! I mean, it's not like i'm taking a seat or anything. I'll just hop trains from now on, paying is for brainwashed idiots.
Anonymous E triple-posted this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,571
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Not mad, just honest. I steal plenty of music and movies. I pirated (stole) the movie Hannah last night, thank god i didn't pay because that shit was terrible. But, i don't go around pretending I'm being honerable, or try and talk about it piracy like there's nothing wrong with it. I dowbloaf because i'm too big of a pussy to steal from a store, but I still want that shit for free. So, I steal it the safe way. Yes, that makes me a theif. So fucking what?
I just don't get why people try so hard to convinve themselves and everyone else that it's not simply stealing --especially when it's programs and books (music is free to record on the radio, and eventually evrrything is recordable on tv) but books and programs aren't like that. They are always intended to be sold for money, and unauthorized use is theft.
Again, why defend it? Oh, is it that hypocritical christian mentality? It's okay as long as I do it?
Not mad, just honest. I steal plenty of music and movies. I pirated (stole) the movie Hannah last night, thank god i didn't pay because that shit was terrible. But, i don't go around pretending I'm being honerable, or try and talk about it piracy like there's nothing wrong with it. I dowbloaf because i'm too big of a pussy to steal from a store, but I still want that shit for free. So, I steal it the safe way. Yes, that makes me a theif. So fucking what?
I just don't get why people try so hard to convinve themselves and everyone else that it's not simply stealing --especially when it's programs and books (music is free to record on the radio, and eventually evrrything is recordable on tv) but books and programs aren't like that. They are always intended to be sold for money, and unauthorized use is theft.
Again, why defend it? Oh, is it that hypocritical christian mentality? It's okay as long as I do it?
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 replied with this 15 years ago, 20 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,587
@210,562 (swamplights !!V3J448+/B)
Mostly programming guides (I'm learning a few new languages). I also like biographies once in a while.
Mostly programming guides (I'm learning a few new languages). I also like biographies once in a while.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B replied with this 15 years ago, 39 seconds later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,589
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #210,592
@previous (swamplights !!V3J448+/B)
Steve Wozniak's book was cool (learned a lot of stuff I didn't know about him), and I'm reading a few books on WikiLeaks (those don't really count as biographies, but they're non-fictional).
Steve Wozniak's book was cool (learned a lot of stuff I didn't know about him), and I'm reading a few books on WikiLeaks (those don't really count as biographies, but they're non-fictional).
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,611
Anonymous I double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,614
I think I'm going to buy a kindle when I get a windfall in October. What's the best model?
swamplights !!V3J448+/B replied with this 15 years ago, 43 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,640
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 29 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,654
@210,492 (dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46)
Saying that because it doesn't fit a very strict (and debatable) definition of theft means it's not theft and therefore OK and not nearly as bad as theft is like saying that because gay marriage doesn't fit a strict (and debatable) definition of marriage means that gays shouldn't be allowed to get marriage. The definition isn't what's important, it's the ethics involved.
Saying that because it doesn't fit a very strict (and debatable) definition of theft means it's not theft and therefore OK and not nearly as bad as theft is like saying that because gay marriage doesn't fit a strict (and debatable) definition of marriage means that gays shouldn't be allowed to get marriage. The definition isn't what's important, it's the ethics involved.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,692
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Is it not unethical to bear false witness against your neighbor?
There is no objective basis by which unauthorized copying can be equated with theft. Is it unlawful, absolutely. But is it theft, fuck no. Any objective standard for theft requires the original owner be deprived of the original substance. That is simply not the case with unauthorized copying.
Equating unauthorized copying with theft is not only a lie, but it is also a disservice to victims of actual theft. Actual theft is a far more serious crime than unauthorized copying is simply because it deprives the original owner of the original in it's entirety.
Even if we accept the subjective view that unauthorized copying damages the copyright holder, the fact remains damages amount to only a fraction of the total value. Whereas in the case of true theft, 100% of the value has been taken. Equating unauthorized copying with theft is factually inaccurate, unjustified, and simply doesn't stand up to the light of reason. The only reason anyone does so it because they have been conditioned to think this way by copyright holders and lawyers who, at the end of the day, are simply looking to place law enforcement under their command.
The U.S. government now considers copyright infringement as serious a crime as a burglary. That is completely insane. A victim of a burglary is damaged to a far greater and infinitely more real degree than a victim of copyright infringement is.
Is it not unethical to bear false witness against your neighbor?
There is no objective basis by which unauthorized copying can be equated with theft. Is it unlawful, absolutely. But is it theft, fuck no. Any objective standard for theft requires the original owner be deprived of the original substance. That is simply not the case with unauthorized copying.
Equating unauthorized copying with theft is not only a lie, but it is also a disservice to victims of actual theft. Actual theft is a far more serious crime than unauthorized copying is simply because it deprives the original owner of the original in it's entirety.
Even if we accept the subjective view that unauthorized copying damages the copyright holder, the fact remains damages amount to only a fraction of the total value. Whereas in the case of true theft, 100% of the value has been taken. Equating unauthorized copying with theft is factually inaccurate, unjustified, and simply doesn't stand up to the light of reason. The only reason anyone does so it because they have been conditioned to think this way by copyright holders and lawyers who, at the end of the day, are simply looking to place law enforcement under their command.
The U.S. government now considers copyright infringement as serious a crime as a burglary. That is completely insane. A victim of a burglary is damaged to a far greater and infinitely more real degree than a victim of copyright infringement is.
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,845
I don't believe copying is the same as theft, but it's still pretty shitty. Your using something without paying for it even though someone already did the work to make it usable. It's like not tipping a waiter after eating a meal.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,850
brie !OudrPWaUDQ replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,852
@210,563 (E)
@210,564 (E)
> So it's cool to sneak into a movie theater and watch movies without paying? Or is that theft of services?
> or sneaking into a football game without a ticket! Or stowing away in the wheel well of an airplane!
No, those are examples of Trespass.
@210,564 (E)
> So it's cool to sneak into a movie theater and watch movies without paying? Or is that theft of services?
> or sneaking into a football game without a ticket! Or stowing away in the wheel well of an airplane!
No, those are examples of Trespass.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,854
@previous (brie !OudrPWaUDQ)
Is it alright to walk into a bookstore with a bunch of blank paper and a pen, pick up a book and then write out the entire book into the paper you brought, and then leave without paying for the book?
Is it alright to walk into a bookstore with a bunch of blank paper and a pen, pick up a book and then write out the entire book into the paper you brought, and then leave without paying for the book?
brie !OudrPWaUDQ replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #210,858
@previous (I)
I see no problem there. Most bookstores will allow a patron to sit and read entire books, even studying from them and taking notes doesn't seem to be an issue, so unless you are asked to leave there's nothing wrong or illegal about making a copy of some data you found in a book.
I see no problem there. Most bookstores will allow a patron to sit and read entire books, even studying from them and taking notes doesn't seem to be an issue, so unless you are asked to leave there's nothing wrong or illegal about making a copy of some data you found in a book.