ebooks-must-increase-freedom.html - en to zh_TW translation catalogue (17 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: E-books must increase our freedom, not decrease it - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_TW: 電子書必須增強我們的自由，而非降低 - GNU 專案 - 自由軟體基金會

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: E-books must increase our freedom, not decrease it
zh_TW: 電子書必須增強我們的自由，而非降低

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I love The Jehovah Contract, and I'd like everyone else to love it too. I have lent it out at least six times over the years. Printed books let us do that.
zh_TW: 我喜歡《The Jehovah Contract》，我也希望其他人都喜歡它。這些年來，我已經把它借給別人六次之多。紙本書讓我們可以這麼做。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Furthermore, you can't sell the e-book after you read it (if Amazon has its way, the used book stores where I have passed many an afternoon will be history). You can't give it to a friend either, because according to Amazon you never really owned it. Amazon requires users to sign an End-User License Agreement (&ldquo;EULA&rdquo;) which says so.
zh_TW: 此外，你不能在讀完之後出售電子書（如果亞馬遜可以這麼做的話，我待過好幾個下午的舊書店早就關門大吉了）。你也沒辦法把它送給朋友，因為根據亞馬遜的說法，你從來都沒有它的所有權。亞馬遜要求使用者必須同意終端使用者授權協定 (&ldquo;EULA&rdquo;)。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: You can't even be sure it will still be in your machine tomorrow.  People reading 1984 in the &ldquo;Kindle&rdquo; had an Orwellian experience: their e-books vanished right before their eyes, as Amazon used a malicious software feature called a &ldquo;back door&rdquo; to remotely delete them (virtual book-burning; is that what &ldquo;Kindle&rdquo; means?). But don't worry; Amazon promised never to do this again, except by order of the state.
zh_TW: 你甚至沒辦法確定它明天還會不會在你的機器上。在 Kindle 中閱讀《1984》的人就有過歐威爾式的經驗：他們的電子書就在他們的眼前消失，因為亞馬遜利用了諸如「後門」之類的惡意功能來遠端刪除它們（虛擬焚書；這是 Kindle 所代表的意思嗎？）。但別擔心，亞馬遜承諾除非有國家命令，否則他們不會再這樣做。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Any one of these encroachments on our freedom is reason aplenty to say no. If these policies were limited to Amazon, we'd bypass them, but the other e-book dealers' policies are roughly similar.
zh_TW: 任何一種對我們自由的侵犯都有充足的理由說不。如果這些政策只有亞馬遜才有，那麼可以迴避它，但其他的電子書經銷商的政策也都大致相同。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: What worries me most is the prospect of losing the option of printed books. The Guardian has announced &ldquo;digital-only reads&rdquo;: in other words, books available only at the price of freedom. I will not read any book at that price. Five years from now, will unauthorized copies be the only ethically acceptable copies for most books?
zh_TW: 最讓我擔心的是失去紙本書籍的可能性。衛報已經宣佈「僅限閱讀電子格式」：換據話說就是以自由為代價換取書籍。我不會在這個價格下閱讀任何書籍。五年後，未經授權的副本會變成大多數書籍唯一道德上可接受的副本嗎？

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It doesn't have to be that way. With anonymous payment on the Internet, paying for downloads of non-DRM non-EULA e-books would respect our freedom. Physical stores could sell such e-books for cash, like digital music on CDs&mdash;still available even though the music industry is aggressively pushing DRM-restrictive services such as Spotify. Physical CD stores face the burden of an expensive inventory, but physical e-book stores could write copies onto your USB memory stick, the only inventory being memory sticks to sell if you need.
zh_TW: 幸好不是所有的電子書都這樣。透過網際網路匿名付款，並下載沒有 DRM 也沒有 EULA 的電子書仍然尊重我們的自由。實體店面也可以出售這樣的電子書來換取現金，就像 CD 上的數位音樂那樣，雖然音樂行業正在積極推動如 Spotify 這類受 DRM 限制的串流服務。實體的 CD 面臨昂貴的庫存負擔，但實體的電子書書店可以將副本寫入您的 USB 隨身碟中，唯一的庫存就是隨身碟，如果你需要的話也可以賣給你。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The reason publishers give for their restrictive e-books practices is to stop people from sharing copies. They say this is for the sake of the authors; but even if it did serve the authors' interests (which for quite famous authors it may), it could not justify DRM, EULAs or the Digital Economy Act which persecutes readers for sharing.  In practice, the copyright system does a bad job of supporting authors aside from the most popular ones. Other authors' principal interest is to be better known, so sharing their work benefits them as well as readers. Why not switch to a system that does the job better and is compatible with sharing?
zh_TW: 出版商為其限制電子書的做法提供的理由是阻止人們分享副本。他們說這是為了作者；但即便它的確符合作者的利益（對於著名的作者來說），也無法為 DRM、EULA 或限制讀者分享的數位經濟法案開脫。實際上，除了知名的作者以外，版權系統在支援作者方面做得並不好。其他作者主要的興趣是更廣為人知，因此分享他們的作品對他們與讀者來說都有好處。為什麼不換成更能完成工作，且又能與分享共存共榮的系統呢？

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: A tax on memories and Internet connectivity, along the general lines of what most EU countries do, could do the job well if three points are got right. The money should be collected by the state and distributed according to law, not given to a private collecting society; it should be divided among all authors, and we mustn’t let companies take any of it from them; and the distribution of money should be based on a sliding scale, not in linear proportion to popularity. I suggest using the cube root of each author's popularity: if A is eight times as popular as B, A gets twice B's amount (not eight times B's amount). This would support many fairly popular writers adequately instead of making a few stars richer.
zh_TW: 對記憶與網路連線課稅，就像大多數的歐盟國家做的那樣，只要做對三點的話就能成功。這筆錢應該由國家收取，依法分配，而不是讓私人機構收取；它應該分配給所有作者，不應該讓公司介入；錢的分配方式應該使用浮動計算法，而不是根據人氣線性分配。我建議使用每個作者受歡迎程度的立方根：如果 A 的人氣是 B 的八倍，那 A 就可以得到 B 的兩倍（而不是 B 的八倍）。這足以支持許多受歡迎的作家，而非讓明星更富有。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Another system is to give each e-reader a button to send some small sum (perhaps 25 pence in the UK) to the author.
zh_TW: 另一個系統是給每個電子書閱讀器一個按鈕，給作者一些小費（在英國可能是 25 便士）。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Sharing is good, and with digital technology, sharing is easy. (I mean non-commercial redistribution of exact copies.) So sharing ought to be legal, and preventing sharing is no excuse to make e-books into handcuffs for readers. If e-books mean that readers' freedom must either increase or decrease, we must demand the increase.
zh_TW: 分享是美好的，使用數位技術，分享更加容易。（我是指非商業性的副本轉散佈。）因此分享應該是合法的，防止分享不應該是電子書成為讀者手銬的藉口。如果電子書代表必須讓讀者的自由增加或減少，我們必須要求增加。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Also consider reading <a href="/philosophy/ebooks.html"> E-Books: Freedom Or Copyright</a>.
zh_TW: 也請閱讀<a href="/philosophy/ebooks.html">電子書：自由或版權</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
zh_TW: 請來信到 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a> 詢問有關自由軟體基金會（FSF）和 GNU 的一般問題；或者<a href="/contact/">以其他方式</a>聯絡自由軟體基金會。至於損毀的連結及其他修正和建議，可以將之寄給 <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_TW: 本頁面採用<a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/deed.zh_TW">創用 CC 姓名標示-禁止改作 4.0 國際</a>條款給予授權。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_TW: <b>翻譯</b>：黃柏諺 <a href="mailto:s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com">&lt;s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com&gt;</a>, 2019.

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_TW: 更新時間︰
