Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate the great
I like this idea, but I think we should use a word other than volatile. We need a word that has negative connotations. Users will connect the negative connotations of the category with the formats, and might use them less (which is how we pressure the vendors).
|
You seem to be implying that it's a "given" that DRM is a "bad thing". This is not a view which I share.
Books are not like music; you may well listen to a CD repeatedly over the years, but most people don't re-read most of their books - they just read them once. Books are generally bought to be read there and then, so all people really care about is that they can be read on their current reading device.
If a publisher or an author feels that they need to have DRM for "security" (even if that security is illusory) then DRM will give us eBooks which we would not otherwise have had, and that is, to my mind, a good thing.
It's far more about perception than reality. You might compare it with, say, street lighting. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that street lighting reduces crime, and yet if you ask almost anyone if they want good street lighting they'll say "yes" because it makes them
feel safer.
DRM is like that on both sides of the argument. Many readers will say "I don't want DRM" even if they have no intention of ever re-reading a book. Many publishers will say "we won't publish without DRM" even if it has no real impact on eBook piracy.
My view is that DRM really doesn't matter one way or another. If you're not going to re-read a book it really doesn't matter if it's got DRM or not.