It looks like the bug was reported by someone named "Alan", yet it doesn't look like any of the authors of those books have that name. So possibly just disgruntled third party pointing out the piracy.
62 up-votes on this link so far, #1 on HN, and it's not even true. A good title goes a long way.
Or maybe people upvote it because of the content, not because of who made it ? If it turns out it's one of the publishers (or even a fan) instead of the author, this bug report will still be just as awesome.
Maybe. But I'm pretty sure it was upvoted because of the sensationalist title.
It has Google in the title, instant upvote for any article with Google, Quora or Stackoverflow.
Would have been even more popular if it read 'her book.'
And included a link to a very colorful but incomprehensible resume.
.. in only 300 lines.
Why is it not true; the bug reporter never claims to be the author, just notes that the book isn't owned by the repo owner (those names don't match) and that the ebook is most likely pirated. If it is not pirated, and wright.edu has access to the Thomson course technology materials, then distributing/making available publicly is certainly a violation of the epub license agreement.
The headline is a pretty clear statement that the author reported the bug; "Author finds pirated version of his book in a Google Code Project, files bug" can't really be read to mean anything else than that the author filed the bug. Coderdude was referring to the headline, not the content of the article.