DRM Good or Bad?

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by gmw

I am not trying to be argumentative, seriously, I'm not. But how have you seen this in personal experience?

I know people whom will not buy anything with protection on it, and deliberately go look for pirated copies so that they can have a copy its not protected. These same people have no problem buying stuff with out protection on it.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by VydorScope

I know people whom will not buy anything with protection on it, and deliberately go look for pirated copies so that they can have a copy its not protected. These same people have no problem buying stuff with out protection on it.

Curious ... I don't know quite what else to say. Is there any reason to think that the numbers of such people would be significant versus, for example, those that, being happy to make a legitimate purchase but don't just like DRM and simply strip it? (These latter appear to be reasonably common, at least from what I've seen in past conversations on this forum.)

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by gmw

Curious ... I don't know quite what else to say. Is there any reason to think that the numbers of such people would be significant versus, for example, those that, being happy to make a legitimate purchase but don't just like DRM and simply strip it? (These latter appear to be reasonably common, at least from what I've seen in past conversations on this forum.)

I have said in other DRM threads that my opinion is that most people do not care about DRM. Most buyers user their device of choice and go to their store of choice and buy books. They do not think about all the draw backs because most people just buy a kindle/nook and stick with it. They WILL be upset however when they learn they can not switch from the Kindle to Nook or something. But again, I do not think most ebook readers even know what DRM is. So long as you stay in the world where you buy, DRM is fairly transparent.

I think here on this forum the "hate" for DRM is much much much higher the rest of the world.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by gmw

Curious ... I don't know quite what else to say. Is there any reason to think that the numbers of such people would be significant versus, for example, those that, being happy to make a legitimate purchase but don't just like DRM and simply strip it? (These latter appear to be reasonably common, at least from what I've seen in past conversations on this forum.)

But that wasn't the question or the conversation.

VS opined that DRM encourages piracy and gave a very valid example of people who look for DRM free versions rather than try to strip, convert, etc.

Whether or not that very likely small group outweighs another group has nothing to do with VS' original opinion.

Another way that DRM encourages piracy is if you consider the very act of stripping DRM to be "piracy" then anyone who buys an Amazon exclusive with DRM, strips the DRM, and loads it to another reader is pirating.

Even if the book is available at multiple stores, that doesn't necessarily solve the problem -- a Nook owner who moves to Europe is going to have trouble buying from B&N since they don't sell overseas.

[DrNefario]

A huge majority of people don't care either way.*

A huge majority of people won't notice whether or not there is DRM. The only time, in fact, that you do notice DRM is when it stops you doing something you want to do with a book you have paid for.

The question could be whether what you want to do with your book is relatively innocent (put it on another device) or not (put it on your website for public download). Which group is likely to be bigger?

*Of those who do care, I'm pretty sure exactly none of them are pro-DRM.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

But that wasn't the question or the conversation.

VS opined that DRM encourages piracy and gave a very valid example of people who look for DRM free versions rather than try to strip, convert, etc.

Whether or not that very likely small group outweighs another group has nothing to do with VS' original opinion.

If only a handful of people do it then "encourages piracy" seems an extreme description of the situation ... it seems to me. But maybe it's just me. This does potentially devolve into an argument similar to the one about whether cartoon (or movie) violence encourages people to to be violent. If it effects one or two people like that, is it really "encouragement", or just one of those things that happens?

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Another way that DRM encourages piracy is if you consider the very act of stripping DRM to be "piracy" then anyone who buys an Amazon exclusive with DRM, strips the DRM, and loads it to another reader is pirating.

Even if the book is available at multiple stores, that doesn't necessarily solve the problem -- a Nook owner who moves to Europe is going to have trouble buying from B&N since they don't sell overseas.

Generally speaking, I think what you do in the privacy of your own home is your business, provided you don't hurt anyone else.

If you strip DRM but continue to use the material under the other conditions that cover copyrighted material, then the only thing you have broken is the license condition saying you must not remove the DRM. So, no, I would not say that stripping DRM is, of itself, a form a piracy. It is merely a violation of that one the license condition, which has nothing to do with copyright.

It's what you do later that may make you guilty of violating copyright and so guilty piracy. And what you do later you can do as easily with non-DRM material as you can with material from which you have stripped DRM. At least that's my interpretation.

[no.guru]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

The only time, in fact, that you do notice DRM is when it stops you doing something you want to do with a book you have paid for.

Or until the ecosystem changes in a way beyond your control that makes your purchased content unavailable on your existing devices, if it's even available at all.

It's not unlikely that a change like this will happen; long-term, I think it's a certainty. The popularity of companies' use of DRM and Amazon's proprietary format baffles me - at least until I remember that almost all of today's younger generations see cloud storage and computing as innovative ideas that have never been done.

It's likely today's crop of consumers will one day be severely schooled in the benefits of local storage and ownership. Maybe only then will DRM become unpopular in general.

DRM circumvents fair use, and that's why it will die.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

A huge majority of people won't notice whether or not there is DRM. The only time, in fact, that you do notice DRM is when it stops you doing something you want to do with a book you have paid for.

The question could be whether what you want to do with your book is relatively innocent (put it on another device) or not (put it on your website for public download). Which group is likely to be bigger?

And which group is going to be considerably more angry when they finally notice the DRM? I doubt it's the ones who expected they would need to remove it before uploading it to a torrent...

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by gmw

So, no, I would not say that stripping DRM is, of itself, a form a piracy.

You, personally, may not but a good many people do. Since there is not a set-in-stone definition of "piracy", that makes these conversations complicated.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

You, personally, may not but a good many people do. Since there is not a set-in-stone definition of "piracy", that makes these conversations complicated.

If a manufacturer or copyright owner puts in place a device to stop or inhibit the reproduction of a digital media and you remove that device for personal use or gain, then it is deemed as piracy under European law. The law in the States is even more specific.

This fact that the stupid bloody thing shouldn't be there in the first place is irrelevant.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

You, personally, may not but a good many people do. Since there is not a set-in-stone definition of "piracy", that makes these conversations complicated.

Fair point. I guess I see piracy of intellectual property as that which actually infringes on the owners rights to exploit the work (eg: making it available to others for free when the owner wants the right to sell it), as opposed to breaking the technicalities that surround copyright - which is how I see the complicated stuff relating to DRM etc, and is obviously a personal opinion and certainly not a legal one.

If real pirates had floated around doing illegal things only to each other and only on their own ship, and never infringing on the rights of other people and ships, then I doubt the name would mean much to us now.

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

If a manufacturer or copyright owner puts in place a device to stop or inhibit the reproduction of a digital media and you remove that device for personal use or gain, then it is deemed as piracy under European law. The law in the States is even more specific.

This fact that the stupid bloody thing shouldn't be there in the first place is irrelevant.

Potentially illegal, yes, but "deemed as piracy"? - I've not seen such a definition. That nit-pick aside, according to this Wikipedia article: "Under DMCA, a potential user who wants to avail herself of an alleged fair use privilege to crack copy protection (which is not prohibited) would have to do it herself since no equipment would lawfully be marketed for that purpose. Under InfoSoc Directive, this possibility would not be available since circumvention of copy protection is illegal." (Though I would also note that the DMCA remains a moving target, with its exemptions changing every three years.)

[no.guru]

Cory Doctorow's talk last December (The Coming War on General Purpose Computation) is relevant to this discussion.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by no.guru

Cory Doctorow's talk last December (The Coming War on General Purpose Computation) is relevant to this discussion.

I've been saying stuff like that for a couple of years now, and everyone just laughs it off. Now we have Windows 8, and every computer will be a tablet.

Kinda wish I hadn't been right.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by gmw

Potentially illegal, yes, but "deemed as piracy"? - I've not seen such a definition.

Sorry the information came from a Wikipedia article too, so I guess you can't reliably quote them! Here is a quote from techtips which seems to contradict what I said.

“Getting rid of your e-book's DRM is allowed for personal use, such as making backup copies or transferring your e-book onto a different device. However, breaking DRM in order to distribute or access pirated copies can get you in serious legal trouble. Violating copyright law can land you with heavy fees or even jail time. Do not share your DRM-hacked e-books with anyone else.”

Originally Posted by gmw

That nit-pick aside, according to this Wikipedia article: "Under DMCA, a potential user who wants to avail herself of an alleged fair use privilege to crack copy protection (which is not prohibited) would have to do it herself since no equipment would lawfully be marketed for that purpose. Under InfoSoc Directive, this possibility would not be available since circumvention of copy protection is illegal." (Though I would also note that the DMCA remains a moving target, with its exemptions changing every three years.)

If that's the case how do the companies that make DVD Ripper, Any Video Converter, Clone DVD, iPubsoft and a thousand others you can find on google continue to be in operation?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

If that's the case how do the companies that make DVD Ripper, Any Video Converter, Clone DVD, iPubsoft and a thousand others you can find on google continue to be in operation?

They manage it by not being based in the US or other jurisdiction where creating, selling or otherwise distributing DRM circumvention technology is illegal.

If DVD ripping software was legal to sell/distribute in the US, you can be sure it would be in iTunes and other products from major software companies.