Profit or Prevention: Which is more important?

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

As I said... this was because there was no concrete data for them to work with, so naturally they over-reacted. There is no reason overly-restrictive DRM can't be scaled back to more reasonable levels.

Of course there is. Ultimately corporations exist for one reason; to make money. The only reason they will scale back DRM is if it has a concrete positive impact on the bottom line (or they are forced to by laws).

The technical term is "squatting." The land was never "owned" by the cattle grazers to begin with, so the only thing they were losing was a free lunch.

Perhaps, but at one point, no one owned the land. The government simply took it when it decided it wanted it and then gave to the people it wanted to. Since most of the land involved was covered by the Homestead act, essentially the government was taking the free lunch away from one group and giving it to another group.

The terms "unprecedented" and "major restrictions" are further examples of assuming the worst without concrete reason... see where this is going? Don't panic... it doesn't have to be that bad. A fire can burn down a forest... or it can provide warmth and comfort, when properly used.

And as Ray Bradbury pointed out in his most famous novel, a fire can also burn books

Even a controlled fire can be very dangerous if close attention is not paid to how it is used. A basic founding principle of this country was that government should be trusted as little as possible. Large corporations, for the most part, did not exist when this country was founded, but I am sure that many of Founding Fathers would be just as wary of giving large amounts of power to corporations.

Sorry... I wasn't aware that we had descended into complete chaos, anarchy, and the destruction of civilization, thanks to the web.

End of the world as we know it is not always a negative thing. Surely as one who is a SF writer and claim to be a futurist, you know that the term can have many connetations. That being said, your discussion about the Web suggests that it is ruled by chaos and anarchy (i.e. Wild West references). Certainly civilization has been majorly transformed by the web; there are very few aspects of our lives that have not been transformed by it.

Frankly, I am far les worried about chaos and anarchy in the long run than I am about too much order and too much control; particularly when it is in the hands of corporations who have at best limited accountability.

No one profits from YouTube videos, either... other than YouTube itself, and those who advertise on the site. Advertising is the real source of revenue... the videos are essentially free giveaways. But convincing the publishing industry that all their literature is worth nothing but carrots drawing people to their paid advertising might be... difficult...

I am not saying that the publishing industry needs to adopt the YouTube model. My point was that traditional buisness models for media no longer work. The most successful businesses are the ones that figure out how to adapt to the new environment.

It would be a real shame if 10-15 years from now, there was no better business model for e-publishing than the current one.

--
Bill

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

The only thing I have a comment on is this:

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

Frankly, I am far les worried about chaos and anarchy in the long run than I am about too much order and too much control; particularly when it is in the hands of corporations who have at best limited accountability.

The people are the ultimate control. Through your purchases, and your votes, you have the ability to dictate control over corporations. Fear of losing control is no reason not to act, but so far, fear has been enough to keep the people at bay, hiding in holes and hoping the problem just goes away by itself, and allowing them to fall into Big Businesses' waiting arms.

All I can say is, people ignore their innate power over Big Business at their own peril.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Interesting that those experts would say that. But, from the way I read the DMCA it is illegal to remove copyright.

<<SNIP>>

BOb

That is indeed an interesting difference of opinion. My notes from the seminar are quite clear that the various experts did indeed express that opinion (e.g. that removing the DRM is not in itself illegal). I haven't found a clear explanation of their reasoning, however. Poor note-taking on my part, I guess.

Xenophon

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

So you should give 3 cheers to the p2p's and the people who refused to pay for music and downloaded it for free since they were the ones that finally determined the music industry to offer drm-free single mp3's and explore so many alternatives. That is people power

There's a difference between not buying something, because you don't like the way it's being sold, and just taking it anyway. I do not applaud p2p sites at all... they encouraged illegal sharing.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

There's a difference between not buying something, because you don't like the way it's being sold, and just taking it anyway. I do not applaud p2p sites at all... they encouraged illegal sharing.

Steve, looks like we can agree on something .

I agree regarding the p2p sites. Most of them were set up when the more centralized services like Napster got shut down. They were and are an attempt to circumvent copyright laws.

In general, the best way to get corporations to listen is with our dollars. Unfortunately, too many people are willing to trade convenience for their fair use rights (imho). My personal practice is that I will not buy DRM'd books or music and as far as I can practically avoid it, I will not purchase a reading device that supports DRM (Though I am not going to toss my Jetbook if they start supporting a DRM'd format with a firmware update).

--
Bill

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

Unfortunately, too many people are willing to trade convenience for their fair use rights (imho).

That, too, is the consumer's choice. (And yes, in this situation, I think it's a bad choice too.) Fortunately, in a healthy market, there are usually multiple vendors that cater to different buying desires, and if vendor A doesn't sell the books you want, or in the format you want, there's always vendor B, C, and D. Amazon is the one huge monkey wrench in this machine, but it hasn't become the only online bookseller yet.

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

My personal practice is that I will not buy DRM'd books or music and as far as I can practically avoid it, I will not purchase a reading device that supports DRM (Though I am not going to toss my Jetbook if they start supporting a DRM'd format with a firmware update).

I don't have as much problem buying hardware that supports DRM... as long as I can bypass DRM'd content and load non-DRM'd books onto it. In the case of a company like Amazon, I think if you bought a Kindle, then did not buy any of Amazon's DRM'd content, they would get the message.

[bill_mchale]

Well, Amazon knows I bought a reader because I bought my Jetbook through their website (one of their online partners).

My particular beef with hardware support for DRM is that in most cases, a portion of the price is going to support the DRM. I would prefer support both publishers and manufacturers who do support DRM free media.

--
Bill

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

My particular beef with hardware support for DRM is that in most cases, a portion of the price is going to support the DRM.

That's a purely ideological observation, and it's up to you whether you allow that to influence your decision to buy... just as I might allow environmental damages caused by manufacturing to influence my decision to buy.

But if that is your stance, it is most important to make sure the manufacturer knows this... otherwise, how are they to change their policies and practices to your liking?

[bill_mchale]

Well,
I did send Ectaco a specific email asking them for additional format support . And of course I am voting with my dollars. I specifically bought the Jetbook because it lacked DRM support.

Finally of course, I hope that manufacturers these days are smart enough to keep up with forums dedicated to their field; it is a smart way to keep track of public opinion. And I am sure everyone will agree, that I am not shy about making my opinion about DRM clear to anyone who asks .

--
Bill

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

My only concern there is that they are more likely to "get the message" from direct contact from users, as opposed to hoping they find this forum and research it on their own. I realize it's more work, but evidence suggests direct contact is more effective than passive info dissemination in most cases.

Sure, a few e-book vendors and resellers lurk around here a lot, but... do you think anyone from Amazon spends much time gathering data from this site? I doubt it.

[bill_mchale]

Steve,
You might be right on that. Ok, perhaps I will start emailing publishers when I see a book I would love to buy in ebook format and I for go because of the fact that it is DRM'd.

--
Bill

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

Well, Amazon knows I bought a reader because I bought my Jetbook through their website (one of their online partners).

My particular beef with hardware support for DRM is that in most cases, a portion of the price is going to support the DRM. I would prefer support both publishers and manufacturers who do support DRM free media.

--
Bill

I'm surprised to hear that you bought from from an Amazon seller, Bill. After all, by doing so a portion of your money is going to Amazon, who support DRM...

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm surprised to hear that you bought from from an Amazon seller, Bill. After all, by doing so a portion of your money is going to Amazon, who support DRM...

Three degrees of separation eh. You can probably link anyone to anything pretty easily.

BOb

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm surprised to hear that you bought from from an Amazon seller, Bill. After all, by doing so a portion of your money is going to Amazon, who support DRM...

There we are getting a little extreme for even my position. In the specific cases I try to avoid directly supporting DRM. However, everyone who buys a Jetbook through Amazon certainly is letting them know that the Kindle is not all things to all ebook readers. It might help Amazon see the light (Since they obviously would make a lot more with Kindle sales).

--
Bill

[basschick]

they also make a lot of sony 505 sales in the marketplace, but it doesn't seem to have changed their perspective...

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

There we are getting a little extreme for even my position. In the specific cases I try to avoid directly supporting DRM. However, everyone who buys a Jetbook through Amazon certainly is letting them know that the Kindle is not all things to all ebook readers. It might help Amazon see the light (Since they obviously would make a lot more with Kindle sales).

--
Bill