Why i think the Illiad will fail (or has already).

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by b_k

My first guess would be the MAC of the ethernet port. But there could also be a CPU-ID or a serial from some of the other components.

The MAC can be tweaked, but probably the vast majority of users don't know how, and it would be a nuisance if one were trying to trick more than one piece of software using different MAC addresses.

I sent a note to eReader asking about iLiad support. They don't have a linux version yet, though they do have a Mac OSX version, which shouldn't be that hard to port.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by nekokami

Interesting. A Java based reader makes it more likely that the reader will continue to work even if existing platforms expire

Actually it doesn't. It means that their reader will work across multiple platforms that support Java.

Originally Posted by nekokami

though if I understand correctly, Mobipocket only allows you to have up to four devices activated at once, and sets the device ID for only the activated devices when the eBooks are downloaded.

So when Mobipocket goes out of business (which is inevitable for proprietary formats), you still won't be able to use your eBooks on new devices - even if they do support Java.

Originally Posted by nekokami

Of all DRM systems, I still think the "least evil" is probably eReader/Palm Digital Media, which uses your credit card number as the key.

And how long do you keep the same card number? I'll bet that the answer is far smaller than the length of time you keep some books.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

And how long do you keep the same card number? I'll bet that the answer is far smaller than the length of time you keep some books.

The credit card does not need to remain active. However, I do, in fact, have a credit card which I have had for about 20 years. There are books I've had for longer, but not as many as I've bought since.

You've made your position on DRM eminently clear in a multitude of posts. Less clear is what you, personally, are doing to help bring about an alternative reliable channel for authors to reach readers who are interested in their work, and for readers to find new works in which they are interested. A boycott is not a constructive strategy in the absence of a competitive alternative. (Downloading pirated copies of books you buy in paper is not a viable alternative for the majority of users. Most books in print are not available this way, there are inherent risks in accessing "warez" sites, the formatting and proofing of the documents are generally poor, the activity is effectively invisible to publishers, and some law-abiding people will simply refuse to pursue this course.) If you really believe a publishing house can be successful with no editors and no DRM, go start one. If you're right, we'll all be happy and you'll put the current vendors out of business. You'll also be quite wealthy, and deservedly so.

Meanwhile, another alternative is working with vendors whose business model seems better than their competitors, even if still not ideal. I think this is a worthwhile strategy. You may not. I can respect your point of view. Can you do the same for mine?

[markiehill]

To be honest i cannot see how it is possible to attract new authors to a model which does not protect their work. Having it freely available and relying on peoples honesty is a huge risk and i believe that it will not provide enough security for a lot of authors to take the risk in investing a year of their life to write a book.

Conversely it may help some authors get noticed and go direct to their public thus cutting out editors and publishing houses, but i think in general it will be to the detriement of the industry. That saying it is not correct for a publisher to expect to charge the same price as a bound copy, digital media should always be much cheaper as the transport, production costs are not the same.

I am a firm beliver in the right of the consumer to have as flexible and open model as possible to consume digital media but i do not belive that a free and open model will work. For instance how many people download winzip but dont pay a penny for it even though they have a reminder screen telling them they have to pay every time they use it.

DRM and flexibility do not sit side by side at the moment , and i share some of the concerns echoed on this thread. Personally i am disgusted at some of the DRM stuff in Vista , to the point where i wont be using it. I believe that it may be Microsoft's worst mistake yet. I have been to Redmond and spent time with the dev teams so if they are losing the confidence of people like me, they must be doing something very wrong IMHO.

Anyway whilst we make the transition to the new world, we must embrace some form of protection for authors or they will refuse to allow their works to be published to digital media. For people who say DRM does not work, you only have to look at Sky Digital in the UK, they have the market well sewn up with DRM which works and has not been cracked, so its only a matter of time before somebody comes up with a solution that cannot be worked around.


Mark

[VillageReader]

Originally Posted by nekokami

Interesting. A Java based reader makes it more likely that the reader will continue to work even if existing platforms expire, though if I understand correctly, Mobipocket only allows you to have up to four devices activated at once, and sets the device ID for only the activated devices when the eBooks are downloaded. I wonder how the device ID will be set for the iLiad? Does it have a software-accessable serial number?

Mobipocket's prices aren't that great when you consider they still hold your content hostage. You get maybe a dollar off paperback prices at best, and if they fold or don't support a future system, you can't read your content anymore. Of all DRM systems, I still think the "least evil" is probably eReader/Palm Digital Media, which uses your credit card number as the key. Too bad they don't have a Java version.

ON the other hand, our library uses Mobipocket for electronic books, so it is free. Can't beat that price with a stick

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by nekokami

The credit card does not need to remain active. However, I do, in fact, have a credit card which I have had for about 20 years. There are books I've had for longer, but not as many as I've bought since.

My understanding was that the reader accepted only 1 credit card number at a time.

So if you purchase a book with CC#1 and another book with CC#2, you couldn't easily swap between the two.

Originally Posted by nekokami

You've made your position on DRM eminently clear in a multitude of posts. Less clear is what you, personally, are doing to help bring about an alternative reliable channel for authors to reach readers who are interested in their work, and for readers to find new works in which they are interested.

I thought that I had made it very clear.

The negative:
1. Speaking out against DRM. Making sure that people know that this represents a significant shift in the Copyright agreement and that it basically takes all rights away from content users and reserves all rights to content holders.
2. Boycotting all forms of DRM and speaking out against those companies who try to sneak it in.

The positive:
1. Supporting artists who make use of Creative Commons licenses.
2. Supporting authors who make their books available without DRM - mainly fincially through purchases (Fictionwise, Baen Books), donations (in the case of those authors who let their works go without demanding payments.
3. If I see a work being passed around when I know it's available without DRM for a reasonable price, I speak out against the people passing the work around (you'd be surprised how little this happens compared to DRMed works).

A view of my bookshelves will show many books by people who make their products available for free on the web. MegaTokyo, Aoi House, Errant Story, Cory Doctorow and more.

(Side note: I believe that I have the distinction of being the person who has paid the most for a Cory Doctorow novel. I purchased the proof of his Someone Comes To Town, Someone Leaves Town at Penguicon a couple years ago.)

I have many, many books from Fictionwise. I have my subscription to Baen Universe (and will very probably be renewing it).

And that's just for eBooks.

I am a content consumer and I vote with my wallet. DRMed content will not get my money.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by markiehill

To be honest i cannot see how it is possible to attract new authors to a model which does not protect their work. Having it freely available and relying on peoples honesty is a huge risk and i believe that it will not provide enough security for a lot of authors to take the risk in investing a year of their life to write a book.

And I can't see people paying money to rent an eBook while you can rent it for free at the library.

One idea that I had was this:
All works must be registered with the gov't (sort of like the way Copyright was).
Just about anyone can set up a content server. Everytime someone wants content, the server sends a message to the gov't and checks on the state of the work.
If the copyright has expired, the content is sent to the user unencrypted.
If the copyright is still in force, the content is encrypted for the user only.
(This is just to prevent one user from sharing with another.)
The content is sent to the user for no money.
A message is sent to the gov't telling them that the content has been requested by a user.
Everyone pays a Content Tax - let's say like Income Tax where it's tied to how much you make.
The gov't uses number of downloads of a work to decide how to split the money from the Content Tax. The more popular the work, the more the author gets.

Imperfect, but it's just an idea. Everyone gets content. The content is locked up only until the Copyright expires. Since all content is "free", it eliminates the need to pirate it. Content creators get rewarded based on how good their work is.

Originally Posted by markiehill

Anyway whilst we make the transition to the new world, we must embrace some form of protection for authors or they will refuse to allow their works to be published to digital media.

But that's what Copyright is for.

Unfortunately, the moment that they made Copyright extend beyond the author's life, they made Copyright disrespectful - so no one respects it.

Originally Posted by markiehill

For people who say DRM does not work, you only have to look at Sky Digital in the UK, they have the market well sewn up with DRM which works and has not been cracked, so its only a matter of time before somebody comes up with a solution that cannot be worked around.

Many experts have already proven that this will never happen. Anything locked up can be unlocked. Remember that if the device displaying the content can't unlock it to display, then the content is worthless.

I believe that it was Bruce Schneier (counterpane.com, Applied Cryptography, Secrets & Lies) who said that DRM is like encryption - but the attacker is also the recipient. It simply cannot work in the long run.

[markiehill]

You say that the content will be encrypted for the user, what with the users PGP key or something is that your idea ? What happens if user A emails the content to user B, is it wrapped in some kind of envelope that sends a request to the server in your theory ?

Also in terms of a content tax, to make it fair you would have to allow people to opt out of the content tax, not everybody consumes content. Some people would react strongly to being charged for a content they do not consume.

I agree with your comment on the extension of copyright, i thought it was 100 years here in the UK i could be wrong.

I have read Bruce Schneier's books over the years, yet Sky is a secure smart card based system which despite attacks with electron microscopes and other technolgies has not been cracked for the past five years... I agree it will one day but the amount of money and resources required is probably way beyond the gain.

I think what i have been trying to get across is that i am in favour of a fair system, fair to both content creator and content consumer and i don't believe that such a thing exists at present.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by markiehill

You say that the content will be encrypted for the user, what with the users PGP key or something is that your idea ? What happens if user A emails the content to user B, is it wrapped in some kind of envelope that sends a request to the server in your theory ?

The idea was to prevent sharing since I want to keep track of how many times a particular work is downloaded - since that's how authors get compensated. If works were allowed to be shared between people, it wouldn't get recorded and authors would miss out on compensation.

I simply used encryption as a method to lock the content to one person in such a way that it would be difficult to casually give it to someone else.

Originally Posted by markiehill

Also in terms of a content tax, to make it fair you would have to allow people to opt out of the content tax, not everybody consumes content. Some people would react strongly to being charged for a content they do not consume.

You can't opt out of paying taxes that fund your library.
You can't opt out of paying the fees that allow you to hear music on the radio.
You can't opt out of paying the feed that allow you to see shows on broadcast TV.

I would argue that everyone enjoys and benefits from artistic works during their normal day. Some people just enjoy those works more than others.

Originally Posted by markiehill

I think what i have been trying to get across is that i am in favour of a fair system, fair to both content creator and content consumer and i don't believe that such a thing exists at present.

That's what everyone wants (except the Content Cartel). But the problem is that DRM is inherently unfair to the consumer. Which hurts the creator because "DRM" means "don't buy it" to many people.

[RWood]

rlauzon: I see in your utopian plans a call for more and larger government that will settle on one and only one form of eBook for everyone so that they can enforce the copyright protections-restrictions-payments that propose. This is having once central authority deciding what is best for us. They (as all government agencies) will extend their power to allow only the books they agree with.

The open market where new ideas are free to fail and where each person selects what is best for him or her is a far better model than the one you propose. I just see too much "1984" in your plans.

[markiehill]

actually in the UK , you can OPT out of the the taxes that pay for the radio and other government tv channels, it is called the licence fee and provided that you can prove you do not have a content consuming device (a television) then you do not need to pay it and you can opt out.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by RWood

rlauzon: I see in your utopian plans a call for more and larger government that will settle on one and only one form of eBook for everyone so that they can enforce the copyright protections-restrictions-payments that propose. This is having once central authority deciding what is best for us. They (as all government agencies) will extend their power to allow only the books they agree with.

You misunderstood my message. It was simply an idea and, yes, has many, many problems.

The point was that there were 3 alternatives (that I could see):
1. Stay with the current capitalistic market - but trust your customers, dump DRM, and use Copyright law to protect the content.
2. Stay with the current capitalistic market - but treat your customers as criminals, use DRM and lose alot to piracy.
3. Move to a communistic market type (like my idea).

All 3 alternatives have issues. The question is which one has fewer issues.
You've accurately pointed out some of the issues for alterative #3. We have #2 today and it doesn't work well.

[Xpi6]

Here are a couple of good links to further the conversation:

Cory Doctorow's famous speech to the Microsofties on why DRM can't work!

Kelsey and Schneier's proposed Street Performer Protocol, a scheme that seems to provide a realistic basis for compensating content creators.

Read those, and then see if you can still espouse the cause of DRM.

[jæd]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

The point was that there were 3 alternatives (that I could see):

Your missing out #4:

4. Use weak encryption to so the majority don't know how to break it, but the technically literate can. See iTunes for a working example...

Originally Posted by rlauzon

3. Move to a communistic market type (like my idea).

See the history books for reasons why this doesn't tend to work...

[narve]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

You misunderstood my message. It was simply an idea and, yes, has many, many problems.

The point was that there were 3 alternatives (that I could see):
1. Stay with the current capitalistic market - but trust your customers, dump DRM, and use Copyright law to protect the content.
2. Stay with the current capitalistic market - but treat your customers as criminals, use DRM and lose alot to piracy.
3. Move to a communistic market type (like my idea).

All 3 alternatives have issues. The question is which one has fewer issues.
You've accurately pointed out some of the issues for alterative #3. We have #2 today and it doesn't work well.

Not that I don't like your reasoning, but to be fair, #1 should be revised to:

1. Stay with the current capitalistic market - but trust your customers, dump DRM, and use Copyright law to protect the content, and lose alot to piracy/copyright law circumvention.

Copyright law circumvention _could_ be reduced if the products were looked upon as fair and square and the price was low enough. But don't count on it... at the best assuming so is questionable. Personally I think people will pirate anyway, at least if the price is high.

Jæd's alternative 4 is a good one, and is widely used today