DRM, or not DRM: that is the question (poll)

[Xenophon]

As currently worded, the poll implies that there is no available content that is current, legally purchased, and DRM-free. The only DRM content on my Sony Reader is the stuff I got with the connect store's $50 get-started deal... But every last bit of my ebook library is 100% legal. Let me repeat that:

every last bit of my ebook library is 100% legal.

And it isn't just PG out-of-copyright stuff, either. In fact, the vast majority of my eLibrary is current, paid-for, royalties-received-by-the-author, purchased-legally-from-the-publisher frontlist books.

Please, please, please, fix the wording of the poll to recognize that there are other choices out there. I admit that you wind up restricted to Baen, a couple of University presses, the National Academies Press, the National Science Foundation's press, and a few other publishers. But there really IS legal, current, non-DRM content out there.

Shame on you for implying otherwise.

Xenophon

P.S. I'm definitely not a pirate, either. And I resent the implication.

[UncleDuke]

somebody got up on the wrong side of the page turn button. i never thought the question was about skull and crossbones pirates. this is a legal forum that promotes legal sources of lit. everyone here from the editors to the members support that. we have a lot of authors here that need your support. no one ever mentioned pirated copies.

[RWood]

Same here Duke. I never thought the question had to do with illegal books. Just the addition or non-addition of DRM to a reader.

Someone doth protest too much.

[NatCh]

Peace, Xenophon, I'm pretty sure that Alexander, of all people, never meant to imply that anyone was a pirate either in the misleading copyright infringement sense or in the real, "walk the plank" sense! I expect it's just a matter of the phrasing not reading to someone else the way he meant it to read when he wrote it.

It hadn't occurred to me that it could be taken that way either, but now that you've pointed it out, I can see where it could be read that way. In any case, I'm really confident that it wasn't meant that way.

Baen and the other legal sources you mentioned not withstanding (you left out fictionbook's MultiFormat, BTW ), the majority of new titles are going to be DRMed if they're available at all. I think what Alexander was trying to get at was whether our individual views of DRM allow us to buy a reading device that even supports DRM at all (along with non-DRM files), or if we will only buy a reading device that doesn't support DRM at all.

To put it in terms of specific devices (I think Alexander was trying to keep it more general):

• I'm willing to buy something like the Sony Reader, which supports DRM (along with non-DRM file support).
• I'm strongly anti-DRM enough to insist on something like the forthcoming NAEB Reader, which doesn't offer any DRM support at all.

[Alexander Turcic]

I didn't mean the poll to imply that you need to go illegal without DRM. Poll edited, lesson learned.

Sorry about that.

[Xenophon]

Alexander:

Thanks for editing the poll. And sorry 'bout the tone of my post. Chalk it up to thesis-writing-induced stress-out.

Xenophon

(This post brought to you by the letters 'P', 'h', and 'D', and the number "oh dang, I'm running out of time...)

[NatCh]

My wife's finishing up her Dissertation too, you have my sympathy, Xenophon (that is, you have all of my sympathy that she isn't already getting )

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Let's assume that I have a magic box. This box will magically make a duplicate of whatever I put in it...

Now, if I give that copy to a co-worker when I'm done reading it, that's probably illegal. If I sell that copy, it's definitely illegal.

Except that it's not: You can sell to a used bookstore, and that's considered legal. They can resell the book, and that's considered legal. And based on some statutes of law, giving your copy to a friend is not always illegal, unless you transact money for it (it's your method of obtaining the copy that may be considered illegal)...

Clearly, the law is vague concerning paper book sales. No wonder no one has yet been able to work out a viable series of laws for e-books! And until they do, I'd rather avoid buying (and selling) DRM e-books whenever I can.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Except that it's not: You can sell to a used bookstore, and that's considered legal.

You didn't read my words. Please go back and re-read what I wrote.

In my example, I created a copy of the original book. I said that it was illegal to sell the copy that I created using my magic box.

My point was that under Copyright law, certain kinds of copying is legal. Other kinds of copying is not. DRM makes no distinction and stops all copying.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

In my example, I created a copy of the original book. I said that it was illegal to sell the copy that I created using my magic box.

Oop... right. Sorry. Must have had a little brainfart there. I was thinking about the fact that you can legally sell your purchased original to a used bookstore or other entity, something that most publishers seek to prevent with e-books.

[mogui]

DRM is not evil. It's just a little stupid.

I would embrace DRM if:

1/ The same DRM mechanism was on every reading device.
2/ I could freely make copies of anything.
3/ When I wanted to read a book on any device, whether I owned it or not, I would enter my private key into the reader.
4/ I would be charged on a per quantity basis ($0.X per 100 words?).
5/ The money thus charged would go to the author.

The Byzantine mechanisms being dreamed up now by corporations and politicians are enough to curl your hair. If they succeed every home will have a lawyer to advise what to do if you turn on your TV set.

[BruceW]

4/ I would be charged on a per quantity basis ($0.X per 100 words?).

mogui does this mean that you want a system that makes me pay for the same "book" every time I read it. I have a number of "comfort" books that I have read multiple/dozens of times. Do you want me to pay for reading the same "beat up, dog eared paperback" (or the electronic version) everytime I want to revisit a story?

No way buddy! If I need to replace it, then I will buy it again but "read twice pay twice" not ever.

[Vienna01]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

Indeed, a very interesting question asked by Robert Nagle over at TeleRead: If you had the chance to decide among two similar e-reader devices, of which only one supports DRM content, which device would you pick? Any reason to pick the device that does not support DRM?

Make sure to also check out the readers' comments @ TeleRead... some good answers there!

Do I dislike DRM for ebooks as now implemented? Yes. I believe there needs to be a true DRM standard (an open standard that was adopted by most publishers AND reader providers) that permitted us to read the book on ANY reader product. If that were true I woud ACCEPT the need for DRM and LIVE WITH IT. I do not understand the technology that would be necessary to have an open standard implemented across all platforms and products AND still "protect" an author's IP. Maybe it is too difficult to happen in our competitive world.

I would support a DRM standard that permitted end users to loan their ebook to a friend without loaning their reader to the friend (maybe giving up the ability to read the ebook themself while it was ON LOAN). The standard would need to support the public lending library approach where the ebook would be lent for a limited period administered by the library. The DRM standard would allow non-commercial developers to create software readers that ran on general purpose devices PCs, PDAs, Web-based environments...

I'm sure that forum members could add many additional requirements to my thin list. Moreover, I would not be surprised if some forum members could build reference implementations in HW or SW. Maybe a system that uses an approach like the GMS telephone's SIM card would work. The SIM card would be usable in any reader or with general purpose type devices.The SIM might carry the token that provided the Digital Rights but I'm getting in too deep for my limited technical understanding-

Maybe Adobe will be able to make a system happen that is open but alows SW companies such as Adobe to make superior implementations that bring them revenue. It seems as the PDF "standard" for document rendering is open. I see many non-Adobe products to create, edit and read pdf files. Do they violated Adobe's IP? If not maybe Adobe's Digital( don't recall the correct name) initiative will lead to something workable.

I trust I have made many statements that will be cannon fodder for forum comments. Go to it-please.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Vienna01

Do I dislike DRM for ebooks as now implemented? Yes. I believe there needs to be a true DRM standard (an open standard that was adopted by most publishers AND reader providers) that permitted us to read the book on ANY reader product. If that were true I woud ACCEPT the need for DRM and LIVE WITH IT.

It's already been proven that this cannot exist.

DRM must be closed and proprietary in order to work.

Originally Posted by Vienna01

I would support a DRM standard that permitted end users to loan their ebook to a friend without loaning their reader to the friend (maybe giving up the ability to read the ebook themself while it was ON LOAN). The standard would need to support the public lending library approach where the ebook would be lent for a limited period administered by the library. The DRM standard would allow non-commercial developers to create software readers that ran on general purpose devices PCs, PDAs, Web-based environments...

But that's not the purpose of DRM. DRM cannot protect content. We've already proven that.

The purpose of DRM is to lock users into a company - and lock out competition. The whole DRM issue has nothing do to with "IP" (an oxymoron, IHMO) and piracy.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by Vienna01

If not maybe Adobe's Digital( don't recall the correct name) initiative will lead to something workable.

Digital Editions is what you're thinking of, I think.

I'm hopeful that it'll make some progress on the e-book front, and I'm watching it with great interest, myself.

Originally Posted by rlauzon

It's already been proven that this cannot exist.

And all this time, I thought that proving a negative, couldn't be done ... wait! The statement I'm referencing claims that a negative has already been proven! Now I'm confused.