11-18-2012, 03:58 AM | #391 |
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Catlady, I don't see why you are so strongly against a scheme (my proposal of post #356) that doesn't change anything for people that think like you but gives new freedom to media users AND reduces piracy.
Presently, if you buy media from mainstream services (Kindle, iTunes) you can do two things: 1) live happily in the "walled garden" that these services close you in; 2) strip the DRM and be free to share/backup your files, at the price of doing something that breaks a license agreement and/or the law (but with extremely low risk of prosecution). With my "social DRM", you can still do 1) and 2) but you also can do 3) 3) leave the metadata in place and be free to share/backup your files without having to break any license agreement and/or law, accepting that if you behave irresponsibly you can get a fine in the end. I don't want and don't like to break the law or a contract, and would choose 3). You can continue with 2) if you prefer. Why does having other people have more freedom (and accept risks that they are willing to accept) upsets you? |
11-18-2012, 06:20 AM | #392 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
Quote:
You are arguing that your scheme reduces piracy, when in fact all you are doing is redefining the word so that less things are included. |
|
11-18-2012, 06:55 AM | #393 | |
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
My proposal partly redefines "piracy" to make legal some practices (such as having your family read your books) that are important for the social and cultural growth of people. Moreover, even today publishers grudgingly allow/tolerate at least part of this kind of practices through indirect means such as "you can load this file on no more than N devices". Some of these N usually belong to spouses, family, ... In addition to that, my proposal reduces other types of piracy, such as those associated to "casual sharing". |
|
11-18-2012, 06:59 AM | #394 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
Quote:
Which you have redefined to not be piracy. |
|
11-18-2012, 07:41 AM | #395 | |
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
My proposal aims at reducing piracy in general, especially that associated with the uncontrolled proliferation of copies of a file that now tends to happen once DRM has been removed from such file. The only type of "piracy" that my proposal does not reduce (though it regulates it by linking file sharing to social links among people) is sharing media among people who are very close socially and affectively; so close, in fact, that they fully trust each other. That said, calling this second type of sharing "piracy" is, in my view, a distortion forced upon us by scared-to-death publishers who can't control the other, large-scale, types of illegal distribution. Not only it's not "piracy": it's a key element in a well-functioning, sane society where culture is an important part of people's lives. |
|
11-18-2012, 10:03 AM | #396 | |||
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,342
Karma: 52398889
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: Kindle Fire, Kindle Paperwhite, AGPTek Bluetooth Clip
|
Quote:
Quote:
Has anyone anywhere ever faced legal action for stripping DRM for one's personal use? Quote:
Don't you get that it is unacceptable for a person to be held responsible for something beyond his control, something done without his knowledge? If someone steals my wallet, uses my cash to buy a gun, and then shoots someone, am I supposed to share the blame because I allowed my money to be stolen? This discussion is going in circles, and it's not about anything realistic anyway. So I'm done. P.S. I guess I'm not really done--what about public libraries? Somebody borrows a book, uploads it to a file-sharing site; what then, fine the library? Yeah, there are records of who borrowed each book, but no way to prove which of those borrowers is the real crook. Now I'm done. Last edited by Catlady; 11-18-2012 at 10:16 AM. Reason: P.S. added |
|||
11-18-2012, 11:30 AM | #397 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,549
Karma: 3799999
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: O'Fallon, Missouri, USA
Device: Nokia N800, PRS-505, Nook STR Glowlight, Kindle 3
|
Quote:
Still, you're pushing that the person who is the victim, still pay the fine, because it was ultimately their files that were uploaded. You're still talking about millions of people. In a recent study, they found approximately 30% of all computers in the US are infected. Another study from a couple years ago showed that roughly 25% of all computers were part of a botnet (meaning, the infection they had allowed someone to remotely control the computer entirely, and able to do so en mass.) Each of those infected machines is potentially able to leak data, your data. It isn't as easy as you think. A good hacker, clues left behind (if any) are subtle, so difficult to really find anything. Chevron just discovered about a weekago they were infected by the Stuxnet virus, and had been infected going back as far as 2010. If a multinational corporation with tons of money spent on IT can take two years to find a virus, then what chance does Joe Blow on the street? |
|
11-18-2012, 11:42 AM | #398 | |
IOC Chief Archivist
Posts: 3,950
Karma: 53868218
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fruitland Park, FL, USA
Device: Meebook M7, Paperwhite 2021, Fire HD 8+, Fire HD 10+, Lenovo Tab P12
|
Quote:
I wasn't talking about pirates. I was talking about the average ebook user. Your response is talking about pirates, whether they call themselves that or not. Unless, of course, you are under the assumption that most people pirate. If so, I disagree with that assumption. If we rewind a bit, you stated that you believe that small scale sharing among close family / friends is not piracy. However, as has already been mentioned, it currently is piracy. Perhaps it's because you don't feel it's wrong that you assume many people do this form of sharing, but I really don't think that is the case. As much as I've enjoyed participating in this discussion, it seems we've reached a point where no further progress is being made by either of us. But I do commend and thank you and most others who took part for remaining civil and respectful throughout the disagreements. The US holidays are about to get underway with Thanksgiving this week, and I know from experience that time tends to get away from me during the holidays, so I'm bowing out of this conversation so as to have one less thing to keep track of. Again, thank you for the opportunity to discuss your ideas in a friendly manner. |
|
11-18-2012, 12:51 PM | #399 | |||
Padawan Learner
Posts: 243
Karma: 1085815
Join Date: May 2009
Location: www.OutlawGalaxy.com, Foothills of NY's Adirondack mountains
Device: My PC...using Puppy Linux (FBReader, Calibre, Kindle Cloud Reader,
|
Quote:
Say I buy an ebook for $5, that's a $250 fine...and people can make unlimited copies of that file safely and distributed with no fear of punishment. No way the publishers will ever, ever, ever sign off on this. Quote:
I see teens doing this to each other all the freaking time just for spite. I do think it will happen and the end result is that in order to have these fines levied, you have to PROVE the files were intentionally seeded or...else innocent people are being penalized. It is almost as bad as the three strikes proposals where people could be kicked off the internet without actually proving guilt. Or else you are setting up the media companies to pay for expensive investigations...no doubt ones that the defendant will be expected to pay for...and so the cost of reimbursing the investigation is going to be much higher than the fine. And so, like the RIAA lawsuits, people will be forced to "admit guilt" even if they are innocent and pay fines, even if they are innocent, because they can't afford to prove their innocence. It's a system with plenty of potential for abuse IMO. Quote:
As for protecting the publishers...honestly, the best solution is for readers to boycott publishers and authors that refuse to sell DRM free. Period. Full stop. Boycott. Buy from authors and publishers who get it, make them the new best-sellers. Show how authors who get it are getting rich, rich, rich. There are plenty of great authors who do get it... Force the publishers to change their policies because they realize they are losing much more than they are gaining. |
|||
11-18-2012, 02:36 PM | #400 | |
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
With my "social DRM" scheme, getting a fine for illegal distribution is not impossible (if you share carelessly), so the fine does not need a symbolic value. It gets back to the original function of fines: a warning, just as a traffic ticket. So the amount of the fine can be set at reasonable value. By the way, publishers will be the first to want reasonably low values, otherwise people will start stripping metadata from files "just in case". Writing successful computer viruses or setting up botnets requires a high level of technical skills, time, and money. I don't think that someone will be interested in doing such things (and risking criminal prosecution) just to copy media files and then upload them for free on the internet. |
|
11-18-2012, 03:07 PM | #401 | |||
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Have a nice holiday! :-) |
|||
11-18-2012, 03:12 PM | #402 | |
Nameless Being
|
Quote:
|
|
11-18-2012, 03:29 PM | #403 | |||||
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
Quote:
So I think that wise publishers could understand that my system gives them more protection, not less. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And you don't need encryption, only good old removal of read permissions on your media files for users that are not your own (and a switch-on PIN for mobile devices). I am not so convinced that this method can succeed, considering the forces involved. Or that it can succeed in less than 25 years. But I'd like that! Last edited by BoldlyDubious; 11-18-2012 at 03:41 PM. |
|||||
11-18-2012, 03:45 PM | #404 | |
what if...?
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
|
Quote:
|
|
11-18-2012, 04:52 PM | #405 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,264
Karma: 10203040
Join Date: Dec 2011
Device: a variety (mostly kindles and kobos)
|
Quote:
The more I think about this proposal the more it seems like a lot of change for not very much gain. I get that you care a lot about having the freedom to share legally with friends and family. However limited sharing is already available legally (use on N devices, lend the physcial device). For me the downsides to your scheme are not worth the extra little bit of freedom. But I think a lot of these arguments become irrelevant unless and until you can convince publishers to adopt your scheme. I suspect that if you could get them interested by the time it came to agreement the fines/penalties would be much harsher and the "legalised casual sharing" would be more limited than you propose. In fact I suspect it wouldn't be much different to what we have now but with water-marked files. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kobo Touch User Guide Updated | Thasaidon | Kobo Reader | 3 | 01-12-2012 12:20 PM |
Wish Amazon would post the KFire User Guide | jswinden | Kindle Fire | 9 | 11-14-2011 03:21 PM |
How can an international user buy and use Amazon Kindle? | Over | Amazon Kindle | 16 | 10-29-2009 06:17 PM |
Petition Started to Stop Amazon from Remotely Deleting eBooks from the kindle | eReaderPlanet | News | 14 | 08-06-2009 03:10 PM |