Why are DRM ebooks evil and why should I avoid them like the plague?

[rogerVA]

One more thing. If an ebook is listed as Lending: enabled on Amazon, is that DRM-free?

[rogue_librarian]

No. It means you can lend it once for 14 days.

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Point to one post on MobileRead where someone says authors should not charge for books. Please.

Giggleton seems to say it, or something like it, quite a lot. As far as I can tell, his opinion is that copyright should be abolished and readers should give donations to authors if they like their books.

eg:

Originally Posted by Giggleton

It would also bring us one step closer to a copyright free world, where all books are freely traded and compensation comes in the form of donations after the fact of reading.

and

Originally Posted by Giggleton

By that logic, why not just say all ebooks and by extension all digital content should be priced at 0.00 and will essentially be donationware. It makes perfect sense to me!

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

DRM doesn't hurt the bad guys.

DRM does hurt the good guys.

I do completely agree with you on this point, though. I really don't think DRM is fit for purpose, because it doesn't do the one thing (ie prevent piracy) that it's supposed to do. It does annoy and inconvenience paying customers.

[JSWolf]

To lend an Amazon eBook, does it have to have DRM besides being landable?

[rogue_librarian]

It always does, yes. Gotta make sure you can't read your book while it's loaned out, right?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Now this is repeatedly brought up. Oddly, there seems to have been no public outcry and Amazon seems to have more customers (and customer loyalty) than ever. This leads me to believe that Amazon did not leave its customers in the lurch but provided a smooth, easy migration path to the new DRM scheme (which most customers took). Of course, THAT story will never be aired here.

You are simply incorrect here.

There was no migration path. Everyone lost access to their DRMed ebooks from Amazon once they had to move from their originally authorised installations. (Which happens fairly quickly with computers at the moment.)

There have been outcries about music DRM servers being shut down, which have resulted in the servers being retained for the moment, but they're going to get shut down at some point.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

It always does, yes. Gotta make sure you can't read your book while it's loaned out, right?

So if we go DRM free, bye-bye lending. 8-}

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

So which one do you represent?

Everyone here has been honest about who we are and where we're coming from ... except for you. You clearly don't represent the interests of the readers in your posts, so which is it -- authors or publishers?

I represent the long view and the unpopular truth.
A no DRM world won't be all sunshine and rainbows, contrary to the prevailing dogma here.
I think authors and publishers need to be assured that they will be paid for work. If they don't feel secure, they'll write screenplays, stage plays, or commercial jingles. They wont write novels for free, don't like being ripped off and don';t like being told that piracy and casual sharing is just "advertising" and something they should "put up with". To paraphrase Neil Gaiman, authors aren't our bitches.
To me, DRM is like copyright-a necessary evil and an imperfect tool meant to prevent the author from being screwed over and an encouragement for the author to do the hard work of writing a novel instead of say, writing commercials.
There are some authors and some publishers that are comfortable publishing DRM free. Most aren't , for what I think are good reasons, and I want to keep reading them, so....

[crossi]

No one said anything about being unwilling to pay for their ebooks or that they want to distribute copies to all and sundry. I've invested several thousand dollars in my ebooks and the idea that all that money would just go poof if I switched readers is more than a little disturbing. I don't have thousands to spare to rebuy them all. Authors might be concerned about being ripped off but so am I. I paid for them I should be able to keep them.

[stonetools]

The trick is to co-opt the opposition. And you can't do that without offering positive-to-the-customer options.

But you don't have any...

The customer has the option of buying work DRM free only or stealing. The theft option has always been there. What's interesting is your making excuses for criminals- but then, there have always been excuse makers as well

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Now this is repeatedly brought up. Oddly, there seems to have been no public outcry and Amazon seems to have more customers (and customer loyalty) than ever. This leads me to believe that Amazon did not leave its customers in the lurch but provided a smooth, easy migration path to the new DRM scheme (which most customers took). Of course, THAT story will never be aired here.

That story will never be aired here because it only exists in your imagination.

A very large number of us have been burned on multiple occasions by DRM. I didn't lose anything from Amazon personally, but I lost books when Overdrive pulled out of Fictionwise. I've also lost books from Books On Board because I bought mobi and no longer have access to my previously registered PIDs. That's not counting any of the secure .lit books I bought from any source - as attempting to activate a fresh install of MS Reader is an exercise in futility.

Please note: In no case have I been provided with a smooth/easy migration scheme when DRM support was withdrawn. The closest it came was when Overdrive pulled out of Fictionwise, as they did replace some of the books with ones in a different DRM format - but some purchases were completely lost.

In most cases it's not a major issue - I've read the books and not felt the need to reread them - but DRM has cost me money.

And yes, it's specifically the DRM; in each case I have software that could read the book either natively or through conversion if it were not DRM'd.

So I don't like DRM because it has cost me money by making legitimately purchased files unavailable to me - and has provided no benefit to me whatsoever.

[stonetools]

You are simply incorrect here.

There was no migration path. Everyone lost access to their DRMed ebooks from Amazon once they had to move from their originally authorised installations. (Which happens fairly quickly with computers at the moment.)

Well, I stand corrected. Still, they in fact COULD read the books on their original devices. That's not nothing. I'm going to dig into this some more, because frankly, it seems very unlike Amazon to simply say "FU" to its customers like that.
In the one example I saw where someone had trouble with Amazon DRM, Amazon refunded the customer.
I'm going to look into this, but I 'm betting that Amazon either offered a refund or offered to let the customer download the books again in the new format on proof of payment.
Stay tuned.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I think authors and publishers need to be assured that they will be paid for work. If they don't feel secure, they'll write screenplays, stage plays, or commercial jingles. They wont write novels for free, don't like being ripped off and don';t like being told that piracy and casual sharing is just "advertising" and something they should "put up with". To paraphrase Neil Gaiman, authors aren't our bitches.

The point is not that authors should just "put up with," piracy and casual sharing; the point is that since DRM has had no measurable effect when it comes to reducing either they should stop backing a dead horse and try to replace DRM with something that works.

It's not about saying the abolition of DRM would lead to some mythical utopia of unicorns and glitter-poopies; it's about saying DRM doesn't work as advertised: all it does is inconvenience or infuriate some paying customers.

If it ain't broke: don't fix it.

If it is broke: do fix it.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I very much doubt that DRM will ever concern the average user. The average user is perfectly OK with buying a Kindle or Nook and shopping from Amazon or BN. The few users who are concerned with buying from multiple bookstores or formats buy tablets, PSPs or smartphones (That's what I did) It's left to the digerati to obsess about DRM-something which doesn't make perfect sense to ME.

You keep spouting this same nonsense. And the answer is always the same, too--when "average user" buys a different device and come up against DRM, average user suddenly cares about it. Since most people haven't even bought their first reading device yet, OF COURSE they don't care NOW. That WILL change.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by crossi

No one said anything about being unwilling to pay for their ebooks or that they want to distribute copies to all and sundry. I've invested several thousand dollars in my ebooks and the idea that all that money would just go poof if I switched readers is more than a little disturbing. I don't have thousands to spare to rebuy them all. Authors might be concerned about being ripped off but so am I. I paid for them I should be able to keep them.

The real problem is that everyone here is always full of good intentions . They focus on the inconveniences (real and imagined) of DRM and blithely dismiss the concerns of authors and publishers, apparently not really caring that they want said authors and publishers to take the kind of gamble with their livelihoods which they themselves wouldn't take with THEIR livelihoods.
Now your problem is a serious one(your library would not go poof, btw, regardless of what is said here)
Whats needed is an easy migration path from one DRM scheme to another and the publishers and booksellers deserve all the calumny visited on them here if they do not provide one. That, however, is an argument for better DRM- not no DRM