The article points out the valid complaint from people who do not have access to legitimate ways of obtaining books/information, and makes a point of saying he does not endorse the way library.nu operated.<p>I'd disagree. We're presented with a technology which is slowly replacing the institutions we take for granted and made a great improvement on society. I'm thinking about both libraries and radio.<p>As Neil Young said, piracy is the new radio. Except that it is better and easier to access. And library.nu functioned as my library, except that it is better and easier to access.<p>If the music I was interested overlapped with the mainstream, then radio would probably be good, and if the library had the technical books I like, then that would too. Alas, they don't, and both internet and library.nu are (latter: were) my substitutions. I've downloaded all the books I've purchased after graduating a year ago (which is around 5). Even after owning a book, I've downloaded the same at work and shown it to a colleague, who also ended up purchasing it. When I look for a book on a topic of interest, I search amazon, read a few reviews, then download it on library.nu. The decision to buy it is done after going through the book and see if I like how the author writes, how the example code is, and especially how it covers my specific topic, before buying it. Usually, if it is a broad topic, I do this for about 3-5 books, and decide on which one to buy.<p>I'm going to go further than the author, and endorse library.nu for all its worth. Both as a library and for those who cannot afford, or don't have access. As for the freeloaders, or more precisely the <i>actual</i> losses: I believe they are small enough that it outweighs the cost. And honestly, if they <i>didn't</i>, the marked would adapt.