E-book store price comparison / BooksOnBoard a good deal

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's up to the publisher to determine if they wish to provide a mechanism to transfer the licence to somebody else or not. Doesn't affect the principle that with both paper books and eBooks you're just "buying" the medium, not the contents.

Nicely confused, but you still proved me correct.

If I purchase something, I have certain rights. Among those rights are "First Sale" rights - meaning that I have the right to resell the item - and the publisher has no say in the matter.

As you have admitted, DRM trumps those rights, which implies that I did not purchase the eBook. Furthermore, if you actually read the agreement, you will see that you are paying for a license, not the eBook.

Therefore, an eBook "sale" is not a purchase. You are paying for a license to read the eBook on a particular device.

Since the format of a DRMed eBook is (by necessity) closed and proprietary, and since the license does not permit you to read the eBook with any other reader, you are, in effect, only licensed to read that eBook for a limited time (since your reader will at some point stop working for one reason or another).

Therefore, these eBook sites do not SELL eBooks - they lease them.

[HarryT]

If I purchase something, I have certain rights. Among those rights are "First Sale" rights - meaning that I have the right to resell the item - and the publisher has no say in the matter.

Not at all - there are many things that you buy licences for that cannot be re-sold. A lot of computer software, for example, has non-transferrable licences. Software and eBooks have a great deal in common, in fact; in both cases you are buying a licence to use the product - all that you "own" is the physical medium on which the software is supplied.

Since the format of a DRMed eBook is (by necessity) closed and proprietary, and since the license does not permit you to read the eBook with any other reader, you are, in effect, only licensed to read that eBook for a limited time (since your reader will at some point stop working for one reason or another).

But buy in a format such as, say, MobiPocket, and you can read on a huge range of different devices. No reason to suppose that a time will come in the foreseeable future when you'll no longer be able to obtain a MobiPocket Reader.

I agree that if you buy in a format that's only used by a single manufacturer, your options are much more limited. But that's a decision that you have to make, as an informed purchaser.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Not at all - there are many things that you buy licences for that cannot be re-sold. A lot of computer software, for example, has non-transferrable licences.

Re-read what you wrote. You actually agreed with me.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Software and eBooks have a great deal in common, in fact; in both cases you are buying a licence to use the product - all that you "own" is the physical medium on which the software is supplied.

Nicely confused, but untrue.

When I buy a pBook, I am not buying a license. The only rights that the author has after I have purchased a pBook is copyright - which does not control what I do with the book after the purchase.

Originally Posted by HarryT

But buy in a format such as, say, MobiPocket, and you can read on a huge range of different devices.

I can't read it on my Zaurus SL-C760. I can't read it on my Archos 504. A "huge range of devices" is not "all devices".

Originally Posted by HarryT

No reason to suppose that a time will come in the foreseeable future when you'll no longer be able to obtain a MobiPocket Reader.

History has shown that closed, proprietary formats are doomed to fail.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I agree that if you buy in a format that's only used by a single manufacturer, your options are much more limited. But that's a decision that you have to make, as an informed purchaser.

Which is why I don't pay money to license an eBook - and why most of those sites do not SELL eBooks.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Nicely confused, but untrue.

When I buy a pBook, I am not buying a license. The only rights that the author has after I have purchased a pBook is copyright - which does not control what I do with the book after the purchase.

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect.

You can indeed do whatever you wish with the physical book, yes. Just as you can do whatever you wish with the e-Book file that you've downloaded. But in both cases the law places restrictions on what you can do with the "intellectual property" contained within the book or the file. Eg, when I open a book I have on my desk at the moment the first page says:

All rights reserved. No part of the contents of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of the publisher.

That's all that DRM is doing - preventing you from reproducing or transmitting the contents of the eBook to a third party. It's no different.

I can't read it on my Zaurus SL-C760. I can't read it on my Archos 504. A "huge range of devices" is not "all devices".

Certainly, I agree. But if you had an investment in MobiPocket books you would presumably purchase a device which supported that format.

History has shown that closed, proprietary formats are doomed to fail.

Such as what, for example?

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect.

Ya, right.

Originally Posted by HarryT

All rights reserved. No part of the contents of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of the publisher.

Proves me correct. I can do whatever I want with the pBook - up to reproducing it.

Looking through all the pBooks I have at arm's length here, I see nothing that says that I can't loan the book to a friend. I see nothing that says I can't transfer ownership to someone else. Even if it did say that, I can safely ignore it because it wouldn't hold up in court.

Originally Posted by HarryT

You can indeed do whatever you wish with the physical book, yes. Just as you can do whatever you wish with the e-Book file that you've downloaded.

I cannot transfer ownership of the DRMed eBook.
I cannot loan the DRMed eBook.

So, you are incorrect. I cannot do whatever I wish with the DRMed eBook I downloaded.

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's all that DRM is doing - preventing you from reproducing or transmitting the contents of the eBook to a third party. It's no different.

This is the same Smoke and Mirrors that the pro-DRM people like to spew: "DRM is only there to keep you from copying the eBook".
But it's already been proven, DRM only prohibits honest people from exercising their rights.

The DRM is violating my First Sale rights.
The DRM is preventing me from transferring ownership.

Therefore any DRMed eBook is not SOLD. You do not own a DRMed eBook like you own a pBook. When you pay money for a DRMed eBook, you are getting nothing more than a restrictive license to USE that eBook on a specific reader.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's up to the publisher to determine if they wish to provide a mechanism to transfer the licence to somebody else or not. Doesn't affect the principle that with both paper books and eBooks you're just "buying" the medium, not the contents.

That is an interesting idea. I wonder if it is possible to get the license moved over so I could transfer the book to someone else.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

That is an interesting idea. I wonder if it is possible to get the license moved over so I could transfer the book to someone else.

I've never seen this happen (for an eBook, or any other media), so it would be surprising to see a site that allowed this.

But, if you own something, why do you need permission to transfer ownership?

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's up to the publisher to determine if they wish to provide a mechanism to transfer the licence to somebody else or not. Doesn't affect the principle that with both paper books and eBooks you're just "buying" the medium, not the contents.

Then we are so lucky that the publishers cannot stop the sale of used books. The studios tried to stop the selling of used cd's and it did not work, maybe the publishers would have better luck

Also since the principle is the same, well if you buy a book from Borders and you lose it, you cannot go to the store and ask for another one, so why are we allowed to redownload our bought ebooks if we lose the file. In the spirit of the above quote, you should suggest to all the ebook sellers to allow buyers only one download, and if they lose the file or the pc breaks down, tough luck; after all you lose the print book, that's that

Trying to force analogies between ebooks and print books is very misguided in my opinion; the better way is to acknowledge the differences, and adjust to them. Not easy I agree, so no wonder quite a lot of publishers and authors want ebooks to go away.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

I've never seen this happen (for an eBook, or any other media), so it would be surprising to see a site that allowed this.

But, if you own something, why do you need permission to transfer ownership?

You DO NOT own ebooks, drm'ed or not; the law is very clear on that; any content for which the primary mode of consumption is digital, is licensed not owned, so you cannot resell it; that was the argument music studios made in court when they asked for an injunction against used cd's sale.

Luckily for us, the courts disagreed since after all the primary mode of cd consumption is by playing them in a cd player, not uploading the content to an iPod or similar device which is an ancillary mode of consumption.

So you buy music from iTunes drm'ed or not you cannot resell it; you buy a cd from BMG you can; similar with books, movies... All software is digital by definiton so you cannot resell it and so on...

Transfering licenses can be done legally but is not the custom since the content creators by and large have no incentive to allow it. In the physical case since there is actual ownership, a secondary (used) market can exist independent of the wishes of content creators (who of course would love it to go away).

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

You DO NOT own ebooks, drm'ed or not; the law is very clear on that; any content for which the primary mode of consumption is digital, is licensed not owned, so you cannot resell it; that was the argument music studios made in court when they asked for an injunction against used cd's sale.

Correct. So eBookstores need to stop misleading customers by telling you that you are "buying an eBook" and publishers need to start pricing eBooks accordingly.

No one rents a movie, for example, for the same price as the movie costs in the store. Yet eBook sellers rent eBooks for more than their paper versions.

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

So you buy music from iTunes drm'ed or not you cannot resell it;

Which, to me, means that I didn't buy the music. So I won't pay retail price for the rental of a song.


But this opens another problem: content owners can now control what content you use, when you can use it and how you can use it.

Today they can't make a rule that says "you can read this book only in the bedroom" (mostly because they can't enforce it). But with DRM and laws preventing people from breaking it, they can start to enforce rules like that.

When you add that to the exorbitantly long copyright period, it doesn't bode well for culture.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Correct. So eBookstores need to stop misleading customers by telling you that you are "buying an eBook" and publishers need to start pricing eBooks accordingly.

That's technically true, but I guess we are used to the term buying rather than licensing. I do not have any problem with the no reselling thing for ebooks, my big problem is with drm that prevents me from reading on any device that I want, and is quite useless at its stated purpose (protecting content), while moderately succesful at its unstated purpose (lock into a device, company) especially if like sheep we continue to accept and encourage its use with the mantra, "well they won't do ebooks without drm, so what can we do".

Regarding the control thing, I doubt that society will accept it from the content providers. Already those are some of the most despised companies and groups in the world (I doubt that even the tobacco manufacturers are as despised as RIAA) and ultimately we the consumers are in charge since we simply can refuse to abide by their rules and they cannot do much about it.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

That's technically true, but I guess we are used to the term buying rather than licensing.

If you went to Ford to buy a new car, and they didn't use the words "Buy", "Sell", etc. but instead used the term "license", would you still plunk down $20,000 for a new car?

Probably not. You'd ask questions - find out what "license" means. And then you'd demand a much lower price for the car when you find out.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

Regarding the control thing, I doubt that society will accept it from the content providers. Already those are some of the most despised companies and groups in the world (I doubt that even the tobacco manufacturers are as despised as RIAA)

I think that's a gross exageration. Tobacco companies kill people. The RIAA (which I very much doubt that 1 person in 1000 has ever heard of if you consider the typical "man in the street") does nothing more than to prosecute criminals. You have nothing to fear from the RIAA if you are a law-abiding person.

You're not suggesting that criminals who download tens of thousands of songs illegally should not be prosecuted, are you?

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I think that's a gross exageration. Tobacco companies kill people.

And the Content Cartel is killing culture and has robbed the public of millions of works.

Originally Posted by HarryT

The RIAA (which I very much doubt that 1 person in 1000 has ever heard of if you consider the typical "man in the street") does nothing more than to prosecute criminals.

Using methods of dubious legality (not to mention morality). Plus, they keep losing (when the defendants have enough money to go to court).

The idea that they are doing "nothing more than to prosecute criminals" is not completely true. Some of them are criminals. Many of them are not.

Originally Posted by HarryT

You have nothing to fear from the RIAA if you are a law-abiding person.

Tanya Andersen and Ms. Foster disagree with you.

[HarryT]

The legal system does not insist that a person be guilty before taking legal action against them; just that a prima facie case exist against them. Clearly, the fact that files have been illegally downloaded by a person's computer constitutes such a case, irrespective of whether or not the computer's owner turns out to have been responsible.

I'm a big fan of the RIAA; it's high time someone made it quite clear to people that it is not "acceptable" to use other people's copyrighted material without paying for it.