Q: We members of an online pilots’ forum often discuss a book about an airplane model flown by many of us. The book is out of print and, despite our many requests, likely to remain so. One of us posted an electronic copy of the book and invited others to download it and (at another member’s suggestion) send a check to the author. Ethical? — John Felleman, Palo Alto, Calif.
A: It is generally illegal to publish (i.e., post) an entire copyrighted work without consent, and quite rightly. But it is not always unethical. If the work is truly unavailable through normal channels, then more imaginative sources can be sought.
The fundamental goal of copyright is not to secure profits but to inspire thought. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution empowers Congress to write laws that “promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
When meaningful efforts fail to resurrect an out-of-print book, there’s no good in simply shrugging and allowing its ideas to slip into darkness.
To be so cowed by the letter of the law is to undermine its purpose. In such circumstances, you may ethically download an online version.
But you and your flying friends have not yet reached that point. If the author or publisher declines to reprint, then next you should inquire about permission and payments for online posting.
Update: Some pilots sent checks to the author, Richard Coffey, who returned them because he had no hard copies of his 1996 book, “The Skylane Pilot’s Companion.” He told me by phone: “I’m pleased they still find it useful. They’re welcome to post it and make copies.”
Q: I teach at a private school. A student of mine mentioned that his father works at a hedge fund and his brother at another financial institution. My husband is seeking employment at similar institutions, and contacts like these could be useful. May I ask this student for help? — Name Withheld, New York
A: To seek such a favor from someone over whom you have authority diminishes the possibility of a reply being freely given. The hint of a quid pro quo — a grade raised in appreciation (or lowered vengefully) — is too vivid. Your doing this could suggest that such favors are required from all students, muddying the teacher-student relationship and compromising your integrity.
Send questions and comments for Randy Cohen to Universal Press Syndicate, 4520 Main St., Kansas City, MO 64111, or ethicist@nytimes.com.
