And paying sends the message of "I'm OK with DRM shittified media, abuse me more!"
Stripping DRM is also illegal under DMCA. Might as well just pirate and call it a day. Either way you mention leaves you illegal
As long as you just leech, you're not sharing copyrighted content, and therefore arguably not in breach of copyright.
It is not illegal to mail cash within the US, unless you're trying to avoid paying taxes/launder money.
Not sure about other countries, a cursory web search didn't turn up anything useful.
Yes, which is why nobody is saying "buy second-hand books to support your favorite author".
Also, it's probably a small effect, but I'd guess that the existence of a secondary market contributes to at least some primary sales (since the buyers know they will probably be able to resell a book if they need to, making them more likely to buy a primary copy if they want to read it right now).
Somebody paid for a second-hand copy, nobody paid for a pirated copy.
Incidentally, many favorite books that I pirated when I was broke and had very little room, I later bought paper copies of.
I also pirate most music, but if I really like a band I discovered via piracy, I will buy their vinyl or see them in concert.
The ability to freely share content scondhand, be it a paper book or in digital form, creates new fans. Some of those fans have money to give back, or will share with people that do.
Because they provide a platform (making content more visible), payment processing (which can be 3% or more for some payment methods), customer support etc.
If content producers don't need any of that, they can always have a self-hosted website with their own donation button (or physical mailing address for checks and banknotes, cryptocurrency address etc).
> I think all authors and other content producers should have sort of a tip jar
That tip jar would cut out everybody else involved in the production of a book and in getting you to even find out about it existing.
Every author has the option to self-publish and set their own price (including a "pay-as-you-wish" option), but on the other hand, if they prefer the (relatively) lower risk of going with a traditional publisher, you should also respect that decision and not sidestep that by unilaterally deciding that "oh, I'd prefer you would have made this DRM-free and pay-as-you-wish, here's a check for $20!".
If somebody puts together a different tip jar which supports and even wider variety of people, or does so in a more equitable way, I want to be free to choose that one instead.
Let content compete for legitimacy based on how integrated into the wider community it's associated tip jar is.
Not everybody wants a tip jar. Why should you get to impose your views over that of the author who’s book you want to read?
I don't care if they think I should read it in a couch or a hammock or a bathtub, why should I care whether they think I should print it on a page or project it on my ceiling or peer at it through a cloud of malware?
There are people who want to turn the world into a skinner box. I'm not going to fund their project just because I appreciate an author who has made a deal with them at some point. The author did not make that deal on my behalf.
If I can't pay an author without also paying my enemies, then I'm not going to pay the author. But I'd really rather pay the author.