Books

reminds me of the good ol, fuck you license license

FUCK YOUR LICENSE

You may not reproduce, distribute, or create derivative works from this work.

You may not view, access, or use this work in any way.

You may not download, install, or execute the software described or contained in this work.

You are not allowed.

The author of this software denies ever creating it. This software doesn't exist, and is a figment of your imagination. You are insane.

If you are seeing this notice, you are doing so without permission.

Just seeing these words means you're a pirate. Arrrrrrrr.

If you attempt to reproduce, distribute, create derivative works from, view, access, modify, download, install, or execute this software in any way, you are in violation of this license and are probably in violation of some bullshit laws that some officious prick of a lawmaker decided on without your consent or knowledge.

Fuck you and fuck your license.

Sonic the Hedgehog tried to tell me that too

Just ignore it. It is not enforceable.

Pretty sure the only solution to this is to rip out the page, band it to a brick, and throw said brick through the publisher's window

Not sure what the rest looked like, but some newer authors have the unfortunate inexperience that results in copy/pasting those pages. I've seen this exact wording out there before and I suspect that the rest also includes some iffy sections. I'm fairly sure that whoever cooked up the one I saw was either making it up entirely and thinking that they could throw in anything they want and have it binding; or were outright generating it via one of the llm models.

Either way, whoever cooked it up, and anyone that copy pastes it like that don't understand how copyright works, at least here in the US, and I'm unaware of anywhere in the world where this would be legally enforceable at all. I've looked, to the best of my ability, but only so deep.

What's kinda dumb is that there are a ton of options that are used by publishing companies that you know are written up correctly, and are easy to find. Iirc, the etail booksellers all have copyright pages available as well.

It's like trying to home brew your own contracts; yeah you can do it, but you'll screw up.

But, yeah contact the author since it's self published. Let them know the text as is not only isn't enforceable, but arguments could be made that it invalidates the rest of their boilerplate copyright page. I've never heard of it being challenged in court, but other forms of licensing can be invalidated in entirety by one bad section.

It's a violation of the first sale doctrine. They can ask, but cannot legally prevent the resale.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

The first-sale doctrine creates a basic exception to the copyright holder's distribution right. Once the work is lawfully sold or even transferred gratuitously, the copyright owner's interest in the material object in which the copyrighted work is embodied is exhausted. The owner of the material object can then dispose of it as they see fit. Thus, one who buys a copy of a book is entitled to resell it, rent it, give it away, or destroy it.

This sounds straight out of early 'oughts Napster panic. Did Metallica write a book?

If someone who previously purchased the book, no longer wants it...does that mean they should throw it away? That's a heinous act of violence, in my opinion. Books should be cared for. If you are no longer in a position to preserve that copy, you have an obligation to pass it along to someone who can.

Decline the license. Now you are limited to just the basic rights that copyright law gives, which includes the ability to resell or lend the book.

I would just remove that page physically from the book.

Sounds a bit like a digital copyright with DRM strong-armed into physical book.

I knit and crochet, and sometimes pattern writers will try to forbid people from selling the items made with their patterns, which is nonsense. The pattern itself is copyrighted, but not the item made with the pattern. I always find it vaguely annoying, and hope people don't buy into it.

Seems uninforceable

For what it’s worth the author may not know that warning is there OR if it was self-published it was maybe a default notice automatically added by their publishing tool/software.

I might sound like a dunce, but does this have any legal standing? A library could not stock this book? In the USA, I suppose?

I once visited the web site of an author whose series I was enjoying and was surprised by her angry insistence that selling used books is theft because the author doesn't get a cut. Never bought the rest of the series. It just felt weird.

Ranks up there with the copyright warning I once found that was: you may not quote or reference from this work for any reason unless it exactly aligns with the authors theological conclusions.

I really want to know which book now!

A book that’s anti library, interesting🤔

This book may not be re-read. If you plan to read it more than once, please purchase an additional copy for each read-through.