Indeed, a very interesting question (http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=6395) asked by Robert Nagle over at TeleRead: If you had the chance to decide among two similar e-reader devices, of which only one supports DRM content, which device would you pick? Any reason to pick the device that does not support DRM?

Make sure to also check out the readers' comments (http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=6395#comments) @ TeleRead... some good answers there!

As much as I hate DRM and think it will die of it's own weight sooner or later, the real deciding factor is now and will always be content.

If you are dead-set against ever buying DRM content, get the non-DRM reader and show those manufacturers where your money goes.

Or... Presuming that the aforementioned device supports DRM and non-DRM content, go ahead and pick that one, and chance an occasional DRM book if you want. But expect manufacturers to take that as tacit approval that DRM is okay with you.

I own one device that supports drm (Ebks1150) but I never bought a drm book for it, never even registered it, and a device that does not (Nokia 770/Fbreader) and I can read all my ebooks on either, the choice depending on various factors (books that I reread or short story magazines/collections I tend to Ebk first due to better navigation, first read novels I tend to Nokia since the reading experience is better even than paper for me), so support or lack of such for drm is completely unimportant for me as long I can put my own books reasonably easy on the device.
Since I never buy a book I cannot own (drm books that you cannot convert to open format you DO NOT own, just rent/license for some time), drm support is irrelevant for me.

The DRM support on the Sony Reader was not a factor for me. The support of the other formats was a factor. `What a manufacturer may or may not do in the future is not the point. At anytime I can freeze my unit and not update the firmware. This is also true of computer operating systems. (I still have DOS running in one box here and it has not been updated in over twelve years.)

As for sending a message to the company by buying a non-DRM reader, it won't work. They would never think that way. It must be something else like the advertisements or the box color. The message will be sent if the rreader sales are good but the DRM book purchases are poor. That is a message!

For me, it's not so much does it have DRM support at all, but rather does it support non-DRM formats. That being said, I do try to buy as much material as I can sans-DRM, I will buy stuff if I really want to read it, and I can't get it any other way, but it's a struggle to make myself do so, and a struggle I haven't undertaken very often. :shrug:

I agree fully with NatCh. As long as I can make my own books, I am happy. Some interesting books will unfortunately only be available in a DRM format and if I really, really, really want that book, I will buy it. But books with DRM will be at the bottom of my wish-list and many of them I will probably never buy.

The message will be sent if the rreader sales are good but the DRM book purchases are poor. That is a message!

Probably true. They'll figure out from their book sales if non-DRM is outselling DRM significantly.

Recently, if the e-book was DRM'd, and still expensive, I just bought the paperback. (Not that that helps e-books any...) I've also been consciously spending less time at DRM sites, and looking for more non-DRM sites to potentially buy from.

As for sending a message to the company by buying a non-DRM reader, it won't work. They would never think that way. It must be something else like the advertisements or the box color. The message will be sent if the rreader sales are good but the DRM book purchases are poor. That is a message!


As far as I know from the Fictionwise group (though I do not guarantee accuracy, just what was mentioned there by people who seem knowledgeable), at Fictionwise non-drm outsells drm by 10 to 1 which is the same ratio mentioned in the current music debate. Consistency...

The choice I really wanted was "DRM is irrelevant. I would choose the reader based on other features." I have the books I want on my readers, for the most part, and I ensure that the authors (and publishers) of those books are paid to the same degree that I do with paper books-- I want my favorite writers to keep writing and publishing. 'Nuff said.

My 2 cents:
If I have to pay almost the same for the paper and the e-book version I will go for paper and see where I find the e-version (preferably in plain-text format). Luckily we don't have such a thing as DMCA over here.

you may call me a pirate now, but My point of view in this case is, the author got paid for his work if I buy the paper version. I'm definitely not going to pay for the same thing twice. Especially not if I get locked into a DRM-system.

I have books in all formats - paper, audio and ebooks.

It's only the DRM'd ebooks that cause me problems (see this thread).

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10314

Because I want to encourage more authors to commit to ebooks (most won't unless they are secure) I continue to purchase them.

However, in my view, the way ebook publishers treat their customers is tantamount to assuming all their customers are criminals! It annoys me that I have to "sign a contract" in order to read a book!

Even though I've purchased DRM'ed books and my second reader supports them, I will invariably remove the DRM by whatever means necessary. (even using the 'analogue hole' PrtScrn OCR) I'd rather have a book thats not formatted as well than one I cannot view or store wherever I want.
I know that I'm by an offshoot supporting DRM by buying in that format, but I do try to get non-drm books first but sometimes you have no choice.

DRM only makes copying difficult (and illegal) just like copying paper books is difficult (and illegal). However, unlike paper books DRMed books can only be read by certain devices. If they would provide the readers free, as they do for paper books, then maybe(?) DRM would be OK -- NOT! :rolleyes5

DRM only makes copying difficult (and illegal) just like copying paper books is difficult (and illegal).

I see that the Content Cartel's propaganda war against Fair Use is working.

Copying, under certain conditions, is not illegal.

Let's assume that I have a magic box. This box will magically make a duplicate of whatever I put in it.

I have a beautiful (and expensive) copy of The Lord of the Rings. I want to read it at work, but I'm afraid that it will get damaged there. So I put it in my magic box and make a copy. That copy I take to work. The original goes back on my bookshelf.

This type of copying is completely legal.

Now, if I give that copy to a co-worker when I'm done reading it, that's probably illegal. If I sell that copy, it's definitely illegal.

Also completely legal is for me to copy excerpts for purposes of reporting, criticism, etc.

To (sort of) quote Cory Doctorow: DRM does not distinguish between legal and illegal copying. It simply stops all copying.

But the Content Cartel thinks (and wants to push the idea) that all copying is illegal. There is no legal basis for that idea.

As currently worded, the poll implies that there is no available content that is current, legally purchased, and DRM-free. The only DRM content on my Sony Reader is the stuff I got with the connect store's $50 get-started deal... But every last bit of my ebook library is 100% legal. Let me repeat that:

every last bit of my ebook library is 100% legal.

And it isn't just PG out-of-copyright stuff, either. In fact, the vast majority of my eLibrary is current, paid-for, royalties-received-by-the-author, purchased-legally-from-the-publisher frontlist books.

Please, please, please, fix the wording of the poll to recognize that there are other choices out there. I admit that you wind up restricted to Baen, a couple of University presses, the National Academies Press, the National Science Foundation's press, and a few other publishers. But there really IS legal, current, non-DRM content out there.

Shame on you for implying otherwise.

Xenophon

P.S. I'm definitely not a pirate, either. And I resent the implication. :angry: :angry: :angry:

somebody got up on the wrong side of the page turn button. i never thought the question was about skull and crossbones pirates. this is a legal forum that promotes legal sources of lit. everyone here from the editors to the members support that. we have a lot of authors here that need your support. no one ever mentioned pirated copies.

Same here Duke. I never thought the question had to do with illegal books. Just the addition or non-addition of DRM to a reader.

:D Someone doth protest too much. :D

Peace, Xenophon, I'm pretty sure that Alexander, of all people, never meant to imply that anyone was a pirate either in the misleading copyright infringement sense or in the real, "walk the plank" sense! I expect it's just a matter of the phrasing not reading to someone else the way he meant it to read when he wrote it.

It hadn't occurred to me that it could be taken that way either, but now that you've pointed it out, I can see where it could be read that way. In any case, I'm really confident that it wasn't meant that way.

Baen and the other legal sources you mentioned not withstanding (you left out fictionbook's MultiFormat, BTW http://www.mobileread.com/forums/images/smiliesadd1/wink.gif), the majority of new titles are going to be DRMed if they're available at all. I think what Alexander was trying to get at was whether our individual views of DRM allow us to buy a reading device that even supports DRM at all (along with non-DRM files), or if we will only buy a reading device that doesn't support DRM at all.

To put it in terms of specific devices (I think Alexander was trying to keep it more general):
I'm willing to buy something like the Sony Reader, which supports DRM (along with non-DRM file support).
I'm strongly anti-DRM enough to insist on something like the forthcoming NAEB Reader (http://naebllc.com/page4.html), which doesn't offer any DRM support at all.

I didn't mean the poll to imply that you need to go illegal without DRM. Poll edited, lesson learned.

Sorry about that.

Alexander:

Thanks for editing the poll. And sorry 'bout the tone of my post. Chalk it up to thesis-writing-induced stress-out.

Xenophon

(This post brought to you by the letters 'P', 'h', and 'D', and the number "oh dang, I'm running out of time...)

My wife's finishing up her Dissertation too, you have my sympathy, Xenophon (that is, you have all of my sympathy that she isn't already getting :))

Let's assume that I have a magic box. This box will magically make a duplicate of whatever I put in it...

Now, if I give that copy to a co-worker when I'm done reading it, that's probably illegal. If I sell that copy, it's definitely illegal.

Except that it's not: You can sell to a used bookstore, and that's considered legal. They can resell the book, and that's considered legal. And based on some statutes of law, giving your copy to a friend is not always illegal, unless you transact money for it (it's your method of obtaining the copy that may be considered illegal)...

Clearly, the law is vague concerning paper book sales. No wonder no one has yet been able to work out a viable series of laws for e-books! And until they do, I'd rather avoid buying (and selling) DRM e-books whenever I can.

Except that it's not: You can sell to a used bookstore, and that's considered legal.

You didn't read my words. Please go back and re-read what I wrote.

In my example, I created a copy of the original book. I said that it was illegal to sell the copy that I created using my magic box.

My point was that under Copyright law, certain kinds of copying is legal. Other kinds of copying is not. DRM makes no distinction and stops all copying.

In my example, I created a copy of the original book. I said that it was illegal to sell the copy that I created using my magic box.

Oop... right. Sorry. Must have had a little brainfart there. I was thinking about the fact that you can legally sell your purchased original to a used bookstore or other entity, something that most publishers seek to prevent with e-books.

DRM is not evil. It's just a little stupid.

I would embrace DRM if:

1/ The same DRM mechanism was on every reading device.
2/ I could freely make copies of anything.
3/ When I wanted to read a book on any device, whether I owned it or not, I would enter my private key into the reader.
4/ I would be charged on a per quantity basis ($0.X per 100 words?).
5/ The money thus charged would go to the author.

The Byzantine mechanisms being dreamed up now by corporations and politicians are enough to curl your hair. If they succeed every home will have a lawyer to advise what to do if you turn on your TV set.

:huh: 4/ I would be charged on a per quantity basis ($0.X per 100 words?).

mogui does this mean that you want a system that makes me pay for the same "book" every time I read it. I have a number of "comfort" books that I have read multiple/dozens of times. Do you want me to pay for reading the same "beat up, dog eared paperback" (or the electronic version) everytime I want to revisit a story?

No way buddy! If I need to replace it, then I will buy it again but "read twice pay twice" not ever.

Indeed, a very interesting question (http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=6395) asked by Robert Nagle over at TeleRead: If you had the chance to decide among two similar e-reader devices, of which only one supports DRM content, which device would you pick? Any reason to pick the device that does not support DRM?

Make sure to also check out the readers' comments (http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=6395#comments) @ TeleRead... some good answers there!

Do I dislike DRM for ebooks as now implemented? Yes. I believe there needs to be a true DRM standard (an open standard that was adopted by most publishers AND reader providers) that permitted us to read the book on ANY reader product. If that were true I woud ACCEPT the need for DRM and LIVE WITH IT. I do not understand the technology that would be necessary to have an open standard implemented across all platforms and products AND still "protect" an author's IP. Maybe it is too difficult to happen in our competitive world.

I would support a DRM standard that permitted end users to loan their ebook to a friend without loaning their reader to the friend (maybe giving up the ability to read the ebook themself while it was ON LOAN). The standard would need to support the public lending library approach where the ebook would be lent for a limited period administered by the library. The DRM standard would allow non-commercial developers to create software readers that ran on general purpose devices PCs, PDAs, Web-based environments...

I'm sure that forum members could add many additional requirements to my thin list. Moreover, I would not be surprised if some forum members could build reference implementations in HW or SW. Maybe a system that uses an approach like the GMS telephone's SIM card would work. The SIM card would be usable in any reader or with general purpose type devices.The SIM might carry the token that provided the Digital Rights but I'm getting in too deep for my limited technical understanding-

Maybe Adobe will be able to make a system happen that is open but alows SW companies such as Adobe to make superior implementations that bring them revenue. It seems as the PDF "standard" for document rendering is open. I see many non-Adobe products to create, edit and read pdf files. Do they violated Adobe's IP? If not maybe Adobe's Digital( don't recall the correct name) initiative will lead to something workable.

I trust I have made many statements that will be cannon fodder for forum comments. Go to it-please.

Do I dislike DRM for ebooks as now implemented? Yes. I believe there needs to be a true DRM standard (an open standard that was adopted by most publishers AND reader providers) that permitted us to read the book on ANY reader product. If that were true I woud ACCEPT the need for DRM and LIVE WITH IT.

It's already been proven that this cannot exist.

DRM must be closed and proprietary in order to work.

I would support a DRM standard that permitted end users to loan their ebook to a friend without loaning their reader to the friend (maybe giving up the ability to read the ebook themself while it was ON LOAN). The standard would need to support the public lending library approach where the ebook would be lent for a limited period administered by the library. The DRM standard would allow non-commercial developers to create software readers that ran on general purpose devices PCs, PDAs, Web-based environments...

But that's not the purpose of DRM. DRM cannot protect content. We've already proven that.

The purpose of DRM is to lock users into a company - and lock out competition. The whole DRM issue has nothing do to with "IP" (an oxymoron, IHMO) and piracy.

If not maybe Adobe's Digital( don't recall the correct name) initiative will lead to something workable.Digital Editions is what you're thinking of, I think. :nice:

I'm hopeful that it'll make some progress on the e-book front, and I'm watching it with great interest, myself. :yes:



It's already been proven that this cannot exist.And all this time, I thought that proving a negative, couldn't be done ... wait! The statement I'm referencing claims that a negative has already been proven! Now I'm confused. :confused:

mogui does this mean that you want a system that makes me pay for the same "book" every time I read it. I have a number of "comfort" books that I have read multiple/dozens of times. Do you want me to pay for reading the same "beat up, dog eared paperback" (or the electronic version) everytime I want to revisit a story?
Yes. It would reward the author in proportion to your interest, I grant you there us a lot of comfort in a wall of pBooks. But I have sort of gotten over that so I can travel lightly. In the world of eBooks, we might need a different model so we can continue to encourage the creative act. I have personally bought the same books many times, so I don't mind paying again and again. If the royalty bite was light each time, it wouldn't hurt very much. If you consider the cost of re-reads spread out over books we own, books we loan, library books and used books, the cost per word would be vanishingly small. Remember, this fee goes to the author, not some big company.

Oh, BruceW, I will probably keep my "comfort" books too as long as I can keep my Canadian condo. But over time . . .
It's already been proven that this cannot exist.

DRM must be closed and proprietary in order to work.

Huh?

But that's not the purpose of DRM. DRM cannot protect content. We've already proven that.
Huh again?

The purpose of DRM is to lock users into a company - and lock out competition. The whole DRM issue has nothing do to with "IP" (an oxymoron, IHMO) and piracy.
I want to be clear that I am advocating changing the purpose of DRM. It would be a universal standard available to authors to use to gain compensation for their works. An author would use a public key while the reader would use a private key tied to an account on a server. Some open-source genius could write this protection mechanism in a week. All books under this system would be freely available peer-to-peer.
:mad:
rlauzon, your concerns are valid when applied to the current system, but I am wondering if your statistical references can be applied to a new standard.

Try looking at this from the point of view of the writer. I like to write so I see this issue from the inside. Not to the extent of the folks like Steve Jordan and Eric Flint who self-market, but I share their hopes and dreams and I have looked into many of the issues they have to deal with.

First, if you like to write and feel you have a talent for it, you may be fortunately compelled to write. This compulsion is a great gift. But if, like so many, you have to force yourself to begin writing each day, you will naturally ask yourself, "Why would I try to write for a living?" The answers are not easy and the odds are poor. The publishing industry presents many obstacles from the slush pile to remainders. All of these obstacles can choke off a new author before the public has a chance to respond one way or the other. Some exceptions are the phenomena of blogging and fan-fiction. But the pay is not there.

What if the new author could self-encrypt his work and put it on one or more peer-to-peer networks? He could allow a free read of the first X pages (he decides) to help his marketing. The eReader would show a meter of the costs incurred so the reader could decide when or whether to stop reading, or to continue. The server that collects the money could be run by a bankish sort of company like Paypal (shudder!) and would make statistics available on how many continued to read the book past the free pages. This would give an indication of acceptability. Users of p2p networks can currently attach comments to a download, so that provides a built-in review mechanism. Authors would always have a choice about whether to go the DRMp2p route or the pBook conventional route, or both. Readers would have the same choice.

Sony has a pretty good DRM. If a friend wants to read a book I've purchased, just authorize it with my account, download, install on the reader and read. When done, authorize that reader back to the owner's account and delete book of mine as it no longer will work. That way, I can loan out books without them being kept since they won't be readable once the reader is reauthorized with the original account.

In this thread (http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11994) Neko suggests advertising to support author royalties!

I want to be clear that I am advocating changing the purpose of DRM.

You are proposing nothing of the sort. You are still saying that DRM is used to "protect" content from "piracy" by locking the content up. You are still treating the reader as an attacker.

It would be a universal standard available to authors to use to gain compensation for their works.

Then it cannot work because you've given the people who would pirate the content the diagram of the lock, and the key.

An author would use a public key while the reader would use a private key tied to an account on a server. Some open-source genius could write this protection mechanism in a week. All books under this system would be freely available peer-to-peer.

The reader MUST have the private key in order to unlock the content so you can read it. The reader is a "universal standard". Therefore, the key can be recovered from reader. So we are back to "not protected."

The only way to "protect" content is to not make a "universal standard" and keep the method of locking up the content closed and proprietary. Which locks readers into a particular piece of software.

rlauzon, your concerns are valid when applied to the current system, but I am wondering if your statistical references can be applied to a new standard.

What new standard? You've proposed none.

You are either using a "universal standard" which is removed from the content 10 seconds after its published.
Or you are using a closed standard, which locks you into a reader (or, like most DRM, is broken 30 seconds after the content is published).

Try looking at this from the point of view of the writer.

This is not a writer issue. We've already proven that those authors who have good content get rewarded. Those who don't, don't.

DRM does not benefit writers. DRM only makes publishers feel better. DRM 1) makes eBooks cost more, 2) makes eBooks less useful to readers and 3) eventually pisses off readers.

What if the new author could self-encrypt his work and put it on one or more peer-to-peer networks?

By encrypting his work, he is limiting the number of people who can read his work. So he's simply shooting himself in the foot.

He could allow a free read of the first X pages (he decides) to help his marketing.

He can do that easier by simply releasing the first X pages in an unencrypted format - just like John Scalzi did with The Android Dream.

I can understand that DRM is not popular. But from an author's point of view, releasing months of hard creative work into the hackey-crackey universe isn't too interesting either. What to do?

You can take any combination of the following positions:
1. I (love/hate/am indifferent to) DRM.
2. I think DRM has a use somewhere/DRM is as useless as **** on a *******.
3. I like entertaining new ideas about this issue/I just want to shoot you!
4. I want to play with these ideas/I couldn't possibly care any less.

Any combination of results is a respectable position as far as this forum is concerned. Writing here and reading your comments is exciting to me because we can share ideas (many excellent ones) from all over the world. Heck, that is even better than the coffee house at my old alma mater.

I don't take a hard position on any of this. I like to play with ideas and enjoy the challenge of other minds. I try to offer substantiation where I am able in the form of links and visuals. I am not going to drop everything and launch into a development project over DRMp2p (unless somebody drops a grunch of money on me), because I am basically retired. If someone sees an opportunity here, they are welcome to it. To me, this is merely an exploration of what is possible.

I hope we can all enjoy the thought experiments here. If you think of a way to make something work better, jump in! The example of open-source shows us that many minds are far better than one alone. Synergy is the engine of evolution.

Mogui,

Think of it like this. No amount of DRM is going to protect the author from someone who checks the book out of the library - using interlibrary loan if necessary - slaps it on an OpticBook book scanner and creates a text or pdf file from the result. Thus, for the low, low price of a used OpticBook scanner, the person who wants to get around buying DRM'd ebooks can do so to his/her heart's content. And then that person can post the ebook on IRC, bittorrent, etc. and 'share' it with the rest of the e-world.

And, given that so *many* people detest DRM, the likelihood of a person doing so rises exponentially if the book is released as an ebook *with* DRM. Oops. Readers 1, DRM 0.

Derek

Yes Derek,
I think we are seeing evolution in action. The generative force of the universe, in it's innate cleverness, is telling us how things will be. I am only trying to trick mother nature (I know it is not nice).

I have mostly given up my writing aspirations, as it is not a viable vocation. Sometimes I like to think of a way to make it work better for writers, but it is an uphill battle. I was an engineer for a long time, so it is natural for me to attempt technical solutions.

Mogui,

Writing is quite the viable occupation. However, it's not necessarily the 'wealth-generating' occupation - for most authors - that it has been portrayed in so many movies and TV shows. If you ask John Ringo, David Weber and Eric Flint - all of whom have been writing pre-ebook and post-ebook - they'll tell you that while ebook sales haven't made them 'wealthy', having ebook versions out there *have* acted as advertisement for their printed works. Needless to say, all these authors have their works released sans DRM.

If you want to look for why authors haven't been getting rich from ebook sales, place the blame squarely where it belongs - on the backs of the same publishers who fail, time and again to fully market many of their mid-list authors and who, as far as ebooks are concerned, put more effort into making as difficult as possible for the end customers to enjoy the ebooks than into generating customer awareness of new releases.

Yet you take the side of the publishers with all this 'universal DRM' garbage - and wonder why writing isn't a 'viable vocation'. Hello! Free marketplace here to tell you that when your own publishers shaft you on marketing, product pricing and ease of access by your putative customers, you're going to have crappy sales figures.

And, as I have discovered for myself, (being a writer - but not a *published* novelist/author as only my non-fiction has reached print) readers want *interesting* stories, but with the plethora of works being released each *MONTH* it is hard for them to find out about *new* authors if they don't hear about them. Plus, as we're so often told in the job-seeking and dating processes - FIRST IMPRESSIONS COUNT! If I don't grab their attention with my very first novel, many readers won't come back for seconds.

Derek

If a book is DRM'd I'll resort to buying a paper copy. I find that limiting oneself to an ereader is kind of childish unless there is good reason to do so such as type size for sight impairment or portability in travelling. (there are other good ones too) I still prefer the option of reselling a book if It's possible.

Yet you take the side of the publishers with all this 'universal DRM' garbage - and wonder why writing isn't a 'viable vocation'. Hello! Free marketplace here to tell you that when your own publishers shaft you on marketing, product pricing and ease of access by your putative customers, you're going to have crappy sales figures.

I have been advocating bypassing the publishers. I envision a mechanism that allows readers to publish via p2p, which of course they are free to do now sans DRM. I would like to see the author in control of all these issues.

And, as I have discovered for myself, (being a writer - but not a *published* novelist/author as only my non-fiction has reached print) readers want *interesting* stories, but with the plethora of works being released each *MONTH* it is hard for them to find out about *new* authors if they don't hear about them. Plus, as we're so often told in the job-seeking and dating processes - FIRST IMPRESSIONS COUNT! If I don't grab their attention with my very first novel, many readers won't come back for seconds.

What is your feeling about putting a lot of effort into a work of fiction? Do you do so with optimism? Does being immersed in the writing process give you pleasure? How would you publish your fiction?

I enjoy the work of Lawrence Block. He has the ability to write a book a month, or more, if he chooses. He is a writing machine! I acknowledge his tenacity, but I can't help thinking that the writing process is a lot easier for some.

I agree that to be a popular author you need to publish frequently to sustain reader loyalty. There are some who take a few years between novels. My habit is to find an author I like and read everything she has written. The others that are still writing, I follow faithfully.

Mogui,

For the first question, p2p releases, as you say, are already out there. And the author already has the power to 'take control' of electronic publishing, just look at all the micro-publishers out there on the Internet.

As for putting effort into a work of fiction, my philosophy is if you don't want to put maximum effort into the story, then you shouldn't be writing it. Either set it on the back burner until you regain interest or drop it completely - and get to work on another story. Most authors I've talked to say the same thing - if you're not thinking about other stories, collecting character info, putting plot snippets away or even writing a chapter or so, you're not keeping the creativity engine primed for the story you're most involved with.

And whatever you do - DON'T stop writing the story to go back and edit it! That waits until you get the final chapter written. I can say this because this is one of the things I learned while competing in both the 2005 and 2006 NaNoWriMo contests. I failed my 2005 attempt to write 50,000 words in one month because I got caught up with putting a polish on each chapter. I succeeded in 2006 because I refrained from doing the whole 'but is this chapter/paragraph/sentence good enough' syndrome.

Keep on writing.:smash:

Derek

I have been advocating bypassing the publishers. I envision a mechanism that allows readers to publish via p2p, which of course they are free to do now sans DRM. I would like to see the author in control of all these issues.

What is your feeling about putting a lot of effort into a work of fiction? Do you do so with optimism? Does being immersed in the writing process give you pleasure? How would you publish your fiction?

I enjoy the work of Lawrence Block. He has the ability to write a book a month, or more, if he chooses. He is a writing machine! I acknowledge his tenacity, but I can't help thinking that the writing process is a lot easier for some.

I agree that to be a popular author you need to publish frequently to sustain reader loyalty. There are some who take a few years between novels. My habit is to find an author I like and read everything she has written. The others that are still writing, I follow faithfully.

One of the mysteries is still why publishers don;'t seem to care what we do with pbooks. Are they too lazy? Is it just too hard for them?

Maybe they have latched onto ebooks because controlling the books is just so easy.

The irony is that many publishers aren't getting behind ebooks when u would think they would try to get everyone to use them so they can restrict lending & copying of books and theyby increase sales.

Just a thought - An elibrary using DRMed books would work quite well I would have thought.

Actually, they do care. They would like very much to prevent sales of used books and force everyone who wants to read a book to buy their own new copy. I beleive in 1900s all books carried a notice basically forbidding resale without permission (can't find the exact wording ATM). However, this was later decided illegal in the court when the first-sale doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=First-sale_doctrine&action) was established.

I had an email exchange with a fantasy & mystery author a couple of years ago who was quite irritated that Amazon was encouraging people to sell used copies of books still in print.

My suggestion: set up a web page with an Amazon Associate account and get your own nickel back from every book sold through your site. It won't come to so much for used books, but it's still something. (I'm given to understand that the Amazon commission is actually more per book than authors are paid by the publisher, for new books.)

I'd like to set up a website someday especially for authors to be able to talk about and sell their own books online, using these sorts of affiliate programs. I still haven't worked out how to validate identity, though.

Before I start, I'm going to work within the premise that the DRM supporting reader is a closed architecture that relies on a single proprietary reader application. This application would support its own protected format, and some number of unprotected formats, preferably including an unprotected version of its own format.

If everything worked perfectly, and the device supported my preferred formats, I might well buy it, provided it was significantly less expensive than the other device. Part of my reasoning for this is that I am taking more of a risk with this device than the other. First, there is likely to be a performance overhead for the DRM functionality. Second, as we've seen with Mobipocket recently, there can be issues with DRM servers. Another issue is that there's no guarantee it would continue supporting the other formats, and with a closed architecture a third-party application may not be available should the company reconsider support for a given file type.

I'm more concerned about DRM-restricted content than DRM capable hardware, but all else being equal I would be more likely to go for the non-DRM hardware.

Except that it's not: You can sell to a used bookstore, and that's considered legal. They can resell the book, and that's considered legal. And based on some statutes of law, giving your copy to a friend is not always illegal, unless you transact money for it (it's your method of obtaining the copy that may be considered illegal)...

Clearly, the law is vague concerning paper book sales. No wonder no one has yet been able to work out a viable series of laws for e-books! And until they do, I'd rather avoid buying (and selling) DRM e-books whenever I can.What's vague?

When you buy a paper book, you've bought the physical media. You are welcome to do with that copy as you please: hold on to it, sell it to a used book store, sell or give it to a friend...

What you may not do (except under certain restricted circumstances) is make another physical copy of the book, or an electronic copy of the content of the book. You bought the physical media, and the right to use or pass on that copy. You did not buy the content, or the right to copy and distribute that content.

For practical purposes, one person can have and read a paper book at a time. If more than one person wants to read the book, they have to get their own copies.
______
Dennis

I think the best way to support non-DRM is to support the authors and publishers who don't use it. Let the non-DRM publisher's balance sheets speak to the DRM-based publishers. But that's just me and YMMV. And it doesn't mean that I won't buy DRM, just that the non-DRM winds up getting more money from me.

I think the best way to support non-DRM is to support the authors and publishers who don't use it. Let the non-DRM publisher's balance sheets speak to the DRM-based publishers. But that's just me and YMMV. And it doesn't mean that I won't buy DRM, just that the non-DRM winds up getting more money from me.

I think it is just fine if the reader I choose to buy supports DRMed content as long as it supports the non-DRMed formats I need. The only DRMed content I have purchased has been with my US$50 Connect store credit. I do not and will not pay real money for DRMed content. But that is purely my choice and my reasons may not be your reasons.

When DRM is conceived with public/private key encryption such that I can decrypt my content in perpetuity, and the decryption of that content benefits the author directly, I will buy DRMed content. It has been posted here that any such DRM scheme is doomed to failure. I think that is a failure of the imagination. See PGP security (http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/pgp-attack.html).

1/ Would you post a purchased book on a p2p network if it contained a digital signature that pointed back to you?
2/ If you could download a free reader for any device that was keyed to your digital signature, would you buy DRMed content for it, providing that your content could be displayed on any and all of your reading devices forever?

1/ Would you post a purchased book on a p2p network if it contained a digital signature that pointed back to you? I wouldn't post it on a P2P network, regardless of whether the signature pointed to me.

2/ If you could download a free reader for any device that was keyed to your digital signature, would you buy DRMed content for it, providing that your content could be displayed on any and all of your reading devices forever?Possibly. My big wish is to download content once, and read it on whatever device I happen to have. So I'm strongly in favor of a standard format every reader can support. If a standard DRM that will work on any reader on any device can be implemented, I can probably live with DRM.

Meanwhile, I don't buy DRMed ebooks, and have no plans to start. If the only ebook format is DRMed, I'll buy the paper book. For me, ebooks are a additional format for reading, not a replacement for paper books.
______
Dennis

You are lucky. Where I live English pbooks are an expensive luxury and are very hard to find. But I am studying Chinese and, in time, may be able to read local fiction. Though I visit the west every year, pbooks are just too heavy to bring back.

You are lucky. Where I live English pbooks are an expensive luxury and are very hard to find. But I am studying Chinese and, in time, may be able to read local fiction. Though I visit the west every year, pbooks are just too heavy to bring back.Yes, I suppose I am. I have a good sized book store a couple of blocks from me, a huge one within walking distance, and another huge in walking distance one specializing in closeouts, review copies, and used books that advertises "8 miles of books" and isn't exaggerating.

I love ebooks, but as I said, they are an additional format, not a replacement for paper.
______
Dennis