Hachette UK asking writers to require DRM

[RainingLemur]

There you go.

[tubemonkey]

Here's a Spider Dog with the correct number of legs

[Dulin's Books]

hahaaha

[Freeshadow]

Sounds like some pieces of writing about Linux done by MS. It's called FUD tactics.
Oh hell I'd be so interrsted in reading the authors answers to that...

[Elfwreck]

From the article:

The letter also contains language that will apparently be included in future Hachette imprint contracts, language that would require authors to “ensure that any of his or her licensees of rights in territories not licensed under this agreement” will use DRM.

It mentions that at least one large agency is not sending anything to Hachette until this changes. I hope other agencies are paying attention, because it will really screw over authors if they don't realize that clause is in the contract, and license their works to separate markets without realizing that one of them demands they put drm on *all* their works, no matter who's managing that market.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by sabredog

Hatchette attempted to explain its relevancy in a leaked document a while back.

Hmm:

We protect authors’ intellectual property through strict anti-piracy measures and territorial controls.

Then why do the people who admit to piracy on this board never seem to get sued?

As someone whose eBook reading is mostly via Overdrive, I am all for DRM. I realize it is a low fence, and that millions of people around the world jump over fences, whether digital or physical, every day. I don't see that as an argument against either physical fences or DRM.

If DRM was more effective, perhaps Hatchette would feel comfortable licensing their eBooks to libraries.

Just like high fences, DRM will never be 100 percent. This is good for people who have what I consider a legitimate need to pirate, such as those in dictatorships without freedom to read.

[FizzyWater]

I dislike when any company (particularly companies without moral components) attempt to restrict their employees' actions outside of the workplace.

Hachette has every right to suggest to its authors that selling to competitors that choose not to use DRM might make it harder to sell their own Hachette books with DRM. I don't believe it's right, on the other hand, to require that in their contracts.

I belong to a reader' email list that also includes a lot of romance authors. I don't know if it's specific to the genre, but so many of them are so incredibly naive about business in general. Specific to this conversation, they have these women all wound up about DRM and piracy, but when you try to pin them down to what any of it actually means, they can only say "that's what my publisher, editor, whoever told me."

People need to make informed decisions. Maybe it really is in their best interest to sign with Hachette and refuse to sign with other companies that don't use DRM. But what happens when 5 or 6 years from now they want to release their own old backlist on Smashwords? Oops, sorry, I know you got your rights back, but you can't do that?!

But to be fair to Hachette, this behavior is certainly not specific to the publishing industry. I work for one of those really big financial businesses, and you should see the emails I get telling me what I (dumb little peon that I am) should believe about our politics and who to vote for and what measures to back....it's insulting and annoying.

[Darqref]

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

I dislike when any company (particularly companies without moral components) attempt to restrict their employees' actions outside of the workplace.

Hachette has every right to suggest to its authors that selling to competitors that choose not to use DRM might make it harder to sell their own Hachette books with DRM. I don't believe it's right, on the other hand, to require that in their contracts.

Check out the most recent Business Rusch post at Kriswrites.com. If the reports of the exact language used in the Hatchette contract proposal is correct, this could limit EVERY PIECE OF WRITING the author did that - including blog posts. Wanna try to make Mobileread use DRM?

Kris has added this type of language to her list of absolute deal-breakers. If present in a contract and unable to be negotiated away, don't sign contract.

[EowynCarter]

As someone whose eBook reading is mostly via Overdrive, I am all for DRM. I realize it is a low fence, and that millions of people around the world jump over fences, whether digital or physical, every day. I don't see that as an argument against either physical fences or DRM.

Well, phisical fence prevent acces form place you're not supposed to go to. DRM can sometime prevent you to read the book you paid for and are allowed to read.

I left for holidays forgetting to get some books. Oh, well, i can use my phone to download the books. Except that drm would prevent opening the books on my e-reader... As i lacked ADE to download the books and authorize the reader.

So I got a book without drm, no problem.

[BillSmithBooks]

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Well, phisical fence prevent acces form place you're not supposed to go to. DRM can sometime prevent you to read the book you paid for and are allowed to read.

Exactly.

There are plenty of great authors who are willing to publish without DRM.

I will be certainly glad to not buy authors who chose to publish with Hachette and DRM-cripple their books; there are plenty of quality choices I can happily substitute.

Authors, please don't fall for this BS.

[david_e]

.....

[BillSmithBooks]

Originally Posted by david_e

DRM is rather like an abstinence pledge, cute idea, represents something different to all involved, and completely worthless when circumstance outweighs conscience.

That's perhaps the BEST summary of DRM I've ever read...because, like abstinence pledges, absolutely ineffective and undoubtedly making the problem worse.

Instances of STDs and unwanted pregnancy are considerably higher among victims of "abstinence only" education than those who actually get real, informative, not-driven-by-ideology education on the subject.

[Abtacha]

Originally Posted by david_e

They've probably got a department full of legal whotzit minions who do nothing but try to fight piracy and here is one of their own authors making it easier.

That's the problem right there. Publishers (not only for books, but games and movies as well) need to realise that their goal should not be to stop people from "pirating" their work, it's to get people to buy it. And those two are only superficially related.

[tubemonkey]

I don't care about DRM one way or the other. It doesn't affect my reading.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Abtacha

Publishers (not only for books, but games and movies as well) need to realise that their goal should not be to stop people from "pirating" their work, it's to get people to buy it. And those two are only superficially related.

I think the relationship is in the price. If people think they could easily get the book for free, they will feel like suckers to pay more than a low price.

I don't know about games and movies, but it seems to me that the effect of piracy in music has been for the price of recordings to, after inflation, go down while the prices of live performances increase. The live performance options for authors are limited.