Oh, I get it. So it's the library that is the bad guy here, letting me read (or in this case, listen to) books without my compensating the publisher/author?

But I am compensating the publisher, because (I assume) the library pays a fee every time I check out a book. The library's expense and the publisher's compensation is exactly the same whether I listen to the book in 14 days, or take 14 weeks to listen to my copy of it. If I just purchased the audiobook, the author/publisher would get a one time payment, but if I borrow it from the library, they are compensated when the library purchases the book, and when I (and everybody else) download it. If I couldn't listen to it on my schedule, then I wouldn't download it and there would be no additional compensation. By violating the letter of the copyright law, I am actually benefiting the creators of the material.

The comparison to music and videogames is not appropriate because of the intended and actual usage of the material. As Bitt pointed out, Music is used and re-used, and for that the creator is compensated when I purchase it. The library book is used once, whether I use the copy I made or I use the original library copy. The creator is compensated the same either way. Video games are more like music, they are played over and over. (I still play my copy of DOOM that I purchased legally more than 10 yeas ago. Best videogame ever made!)

tanstaafl.