Unlocking the Gates of Alexandria: DRM, Competition and Access to E-Books

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by toddos

Sell DRM free, watermark inconspicuously to track if my purchase ends up on P2P or similar, and leave it at that.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, permit me to point out yet again that watermaking is a form of DRM. Saying "Sell DRM free" and then adding "watermark inconspicuously" is a contradiction. "DRM" is not synonymous with "encryption". If a book is watermarked, it has DRM.

[mbovenka]

Originally Posted by toddos

Sell DRM free, watermark inconspicuously to track if my purchase ends up on P2P or similar, and leave it at that.

That's where the Dutch ebook market is going. The 800-pound gorilla, bol.com, sells watermarked epubs.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, permit me to point out yet again that watermaking is a form of DRM. Saying "Sell DRM free" and then adding "watermark inconspicuously" is a contradiction. "DRM" is not synonymous with "encryption". If a book is watermarked, it has DRM.

Harry. I gather then that you disagree with the definition of DRM in the paper from the Social Science Research Network linked to in the original post?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

Harry. I gather then that you disagree with the definition of DRM in the paper from the Social Science Research Network linked to in the original post?

In the sense that it says:

More specifically, since each bookseller uses a different proprietary DRM scheme on their ebooks, compatible with a limited number of reading platforms, consumers face problems with interoperability.

yes, I do disagree with it. That appears to be talking more about format differences than DRM. The fact that you can't read an ePub book on a Kindle, for example, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to with DRM.

"DRM", in the broader sense of the term, encompasses any method used to implement digital rights management, and certainly includes watermarking.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

In the sense that it says:

yes, I do disagree with it. That appears to be talking more about format differences than DRM. The fact that you can't read an ePub book on a Kindle, for example, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to with DRM.

"DRM", in the broader sense of the term, encompasses any method used to implement digital rights management, and certainly includes watermarking.

Thanks Harry. Personally I would classify watermarking as a protection technique, but not DRM. I think that its only digital aspect is where it happens to appear in an EBook rather than a paper document. I also note that it does not purport to "manage" rights. I think the definition of DRM in the paper is actually a fairly good one.

In particular, from the first part of the definition in chapter 3 on DRM:

One such possibility is digital rights management (“DRM”), a set of techniques that can control the use and distribution of digital files containing video, audio, photo, or text with the purpose of protecting intellectual property. DRM involves both the management of digital rights (identifying content, collecting metadata, and listing the content rights) and
the enforcement of those rights. As a self-help technology, DRM permits content providers to strictly control the method, time, and place of use.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

Thanks Harry. Personally I would classify watermarking as a protection technique, but not DRM. I think that its only digital aspect is where it happens to appear in an EBook rather than a paper document. I also note that it does not purport to "manage" rights.

It is, however, a tool to aid rights-holders in managing the rights of digital media, and therefore assuredly (IMHO) constitutes a form of DRM. I really think you'll struggle to find many people who think otherwise .

[ApK]

Originally Posted by darryl

Thanks Harry. Personally I would classify watermarking as a protection technique, but not DRM. I think that its only digital aspect is where it happens to appear in an EBook rather than a paper document. I also note that it does not purport to "manage" rights. I think the definition of DRM in the paper is actually a fairly good one.

I'm with Harry.
Digital watermarking is, of course, what we're referring to on this forum, not paper watermarks.
It is technology that manages the rights to the digital content by promising consequences to the user for it's misuse.
It's sometimes called "social DRM" because it manages through user behavior, not just through the technology.

ApK

[darryl]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm with Harry.
Digital watermarking is, of course, what we're referring to on this forum, not paper watermarks.
It is technology that manages the rights to the digital content by promising consequences to the user for it's misuse.
It's sometimes called "social DRM" because it manages through user behavior, not just through the technology.

ApK

Fair enough. I don't feel strongly enough about this to continue arguing the point. It is obviously a matter of your preferred definition of DRM. Personally, I like the one in the paper.

[ZodWallop]

I think that like the discussion on whether the new millennium started in 2,000 or 2,001; there's the side that is right 'on paper' and the side that is right according to a definition most people understand.

I will say that if the only form of DRM purchased books had was an unobtrusive digital watermark, users of Alf's tools would no longer need them. I'm guessing piracy would drop off a bit too.

[charlie - uk]

Originally Posted by HarryT

In the sense that it says:



yes, I do disagree with it. That appears to be talking more about format differences than DRM. The fact that you can't read an ePub book on a Kindle, for example, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to with DRM.

"DRM", in the broader sense of the term, encompasses any method used to implement digital rights management, and certainly includes watermarking.

No it doesn't, it has everything to with Amazon who only want it's own books, &.pdf to be read on it's own ecosystem & hardware. No other e-book hardware vendor does this, just 'walled garden' Amazon :-; .

Only in the bizarre world of Mr Bezos, is this reasonable. I will never subscribe to a company, or hardware that doesn't let me legitimately, back up my own legally purchased software, it's a matter of principal. This is not to say, I don't buy e-books from Amazon, because I do, sometimes there is no other choice, but the first thing that happens is that the DRM, gets taken straight off, before I convert to .epub with Calibre so I can use my non Amazon e-reader :-) ....

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by charlie - uk

No it doesn't, it has everything to with Amazon who only want it's own books, &.pdf to be read on it's own ecosystem & hardware. No other e-book hardware vendor does this, just 'walled garden' Amazon :-; .

Only in the bizarre world of Mr Bezos, is this reasonable. I will never subscribe to a company, or hardware that doesn't let me legitimately, back up my own legally purchased software, it's a matter of principal. This is not to say, I don't buy e-books from Amazon, because I do, sometimes there is no other choice, but the first thing that happens is that the DRM, gets taken straight off, before I convert to .epub with Calibre so I can use my non Amazon e-reader :-) ....

Wrong, wronger, double and triple wrong, with an extra helping of wrongest.

Amazon did not introduce DRM, the publishers did. And every platform which sells ebooks, hardware vendor or otherwise, offers the option to publishers to choose DRM.

With the exception of outliers like Baen, a publishing house which has always exclusively published DRM-free -- and sold their books via their own website. And Tor, which (relatively) recently joined them.

Only in the bizarre world of people-who-just-hate-hate-hate-Amazon-and-accuse-them-of-everything-under-the-sun is Amazon somehow uniquely alone in applying DRM to their books.
(Plus, Jeff Bezos eats babies.)

And besides, you have it all backward; you suggested that Amazon wants their Kindles to only read Amazon-purchased books -- and that that is enforced with DRM.
But it is the ebooks which are DRMed, and the Kindles which can easily read sideloaded and non-DRMed content.



Your profile lists a Kobo ereader. Are you aware that Kobo uses DRM, and moreover that they upset a lot of people a while back by removing the Download buttons on many of the books they sold? Preventing people from downloading their books into Adobe Digital Editions?

[eschwartz]

And in case you were talking about their use of the mobipocket format, keep in mind it actually predates EPUB.

And as you so astutely pointed out, calibre can convert it.

And your Kobo can read it natively.

And in a discussion about DRM, you are being orthogonal.

[charlie - uk]

Gosh, something I said obviously touched a raw nerve :-), sorry if I've offended you in any way & what content would that be then, there is no legal alternative content. Kindles won't read .epub, & most ebook stores are using .epub as an alternative to the closed .mobi, azw3 so legally there is no 'alternative content' for Kindle users to read.

Here without breaking the law, & stripping the DRM off files, Kindle users can't even access the electronic public library network, because of Kindle's lack of .epub support, obviously a calculated decision, on Amazons part, because currently 98 % of other e-reader's support the .epub format.

I'm e-book platform agnostic by the way, I buy from whoever I feel like . I don't actively support any platform, it's not necessary or needed.....

[darryl]

Originally Posted by charlie - uk

Gosh, something I said obviously touched a raw nerve :-), sorry if I've offended you in any way & what content would that be then, there is no legal alternative content. Kindles won't read .epub, & most ebook stores are using .epub as an alternative to the closed .mobi, azw3 so legally there is no 'alternative content' for Kindle users to read.

Here without breaking the law, & stripping the DRM off files, Kindle users can't even access the electronic public library netork, because of Amazon's lack of .epub support.

Your ignorance on this topic is excusable. Your failure to remedy that ignorance, even when things are spelt out for you, is not. You seem to be hopelessly confused between formats and DRM, which are in fact separate things. It may surprise you, and you certainly didn't seem to take any note of eschwartz's last post, but the mobipocket format has been around a long time. Mobi format books are available at many ebook stores other than Amazon, and you can read them just fine on a Kindle. Also, even if it is illegal in your place of residence to remove the DRM, this would not seem to be a problem with any format books without DRM, which Calibre will convert between formats without problems. And all the major ebook stores offer some content without DRM. In the case of Amazon, as previously pointed out to you, the choice to use or not use DRM is left to the particular publisher.

And I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but if you wish to avoid hypocrisy then you can't purchase any content with DRM from any store, be it epub, mobi or other. Assuming that your below statement includes ebooks as "software" (and it does not make any sense otherwise) it precludes this.

I will never subscribe to a company, or hardware that doesn't let me legitimately, back up my own legally purchased software, it's a matter of principal.

Accepting for purposes of discussion that your view of the law precluding DRM removal is correct, then you are no more entitled to remove it from any ebooks that have it, be they azw3, mobi, epub or any other format. For the ones that don't have DRM conversion between formats is a trivial matter, unless of course you are of the view that this too is illegal? Then again, I don't see how this would matter to you, since you are obviously happy to break the law where Amazon books are concerned. Despite the implication in your earlier post and your express statement in your last post that DRM removal is illegal, the first thing you do on those rare occasions you purchase an Amazon ebook is to remove the DRM and convert it to EPub (though I note your use of the passive voice leaves the possibility open that this just happens without any intervention on your part).

Finally, if you are not prepared to remedy your ignorance, please don't continue to post it for all to see.

[barryem]

I think whether digital watermarking is a form of DRM is an open question. Yes it can be used by book sellers to right wrongs, but in and of itself it doesn't actually manage anything. Encryption does manage things in preventing a book from being put on an unauthorized device. Digital watermarking doesn't do that. It manages nothing.

Of course language is always changing and when a phrase becomes an acronym, as in the case of DRM, it often takes on a life and a meaning of it's own, apart from the meaning of the phrase it represents. So in that sense I think it's reasonable to say that digital watermarking is DRM. That's not quite the same as saying it's a form of management.

Barry