DRM Good or Bad?

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by ApK

I don't see anything inherently wrong with that idea. This is the writer's section. I presumed the title of this thread referred to whether DRM was good or bad for the writers.

Sure, but what's good for the customer is good for the seller. As for the bottom line, I have yet to see anyone present verifiable statistics that show beyond doubt that adding DRM to a book increases sales compared to not having the DRM on the same book.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

That must be the shortest reply you have ever made.

Probably the most accurate too.

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Exactly. The MR community is made up of the experts that the vast majority go to for advice and help. And that is why our opinions matter, and why authors should pay attention to the fact that a very large number of very vocal MR members refuse to buy books with DRM. [...]

Do you really think it's true that MR is "made up of the experts"? And what about the "very large number" - how did you work that out? These threads get long, but not because there are a lot of participants. From the various threads I've watched on this topic I would have said there were some people quite knowledgeable on the subject, a more significant number with strong opinions on the subject, and a huge number that are probably not too different from your (for want of a better description) average ebook buyer. I think it would be a mistake to draw too many conclusions from the small percentage of people that actually participate on these threads.

The other thing that I think is often forgotten in these debates is that DRM is simply a non-issue for a large number of readers. They read the book and move on, and never get to care whether they can transfer it to another reader. As Elfwreck noted, they didn't buy the ebook because it had DRM on it, anymore than we buy a pbook for the copyright and publishing details inside the front cover, but as long as most readers get what they did buy (the ability to read the book), they don't care much whether those other bits are there or not.

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Sure, but what's good for the customer is good for the seller. As for the bottom line, I have yet to see anyone present verifiable statistics that show beyond doubt that adding DRM to a book increases sales compared to not having the DRM on the same book.

Nor have I seen the reverse.

[Jaden]

DRM is not like installing a camera in a store. It's more like telling each honest customer who has just bought an item: "You've only paid because there are cameras. Otherwise you would have stolen that item."

And that's just one of the reasons why I really dislike DRM.

Though it's not about books - but if there was something similar I'd react in a similar manner: There's that DVD I've bought new and at full price that has this obnoxious anti piracy spot on it that I can't skip. After realizing that, I was furious. Why do I get punished for buying the DVD instead of pirating the movie? No one who pirates will ever see that clip or care for it (if they are the ones ripping the DVD) - and they won't have to suffer through that clip everytime they watch the DVD, unless me, the honest customer.

Nowadays I do check before buying if there's something like that on the DVD. Doesn't mean I pirate the movies now, but I will not buy a DVD new at full price that has some measure like that. Also I warned my friends about it.

Of course a DVD is not a book - but it's a good example, I think, on how to NOT treat your customers if you want them to buy more of your products.

I can't see DRM helping anyone. It makes people who are aware of it angry or sad, because they can't buy books from Amazon to read on their ePub reader, for example, without stripping DRM. And some people don't want to do that because they are afraid of being punished, even though they have paid for the content and don't want share it or upload it, but simply want to read it.

And to say "then get yourself a Kindle" is like saying "you have to buy a different kind of TV for channel 4-6 than the one you have that works for channel 1-3". A publisher or seller really shouldn't care on which device I read my book (or watch my TV show), as long as I pay for it - unless they want to sell readers and TVs or limit their audience that is, of course.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by gmw

Nor have I seen the reverse.

There are several examples here at Mobileread of "I wouldn't have bought that book if it had DRM."

There aren't any "I would've bought it if it had DRM, but since it doesn't, I skipped it."

Granted, MR is not a representative sample. However, there *is* evidence that non-DRM'd books sell to people who won't buy DRM; there is no evidence for the reverse.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

There are several examples here at Mobileread of "I wouldn't have bought that book if it had DRM."

There aren't any "I would've bought it if it had DRM, but since it doesn't, I skipped it."

Granted, MR is not a representative sample. However, there *is* evidence that non-DRM'd books sell to people who won't buy DRM; there is no evidence for the reverse.

The vast majority of people reading ebooks are new to it. Which means they haven't run into problems with DRM yet, so they don't care or don't even know DRM exists. But I predict that many of them will have some issues with it sooner or later -- and then they will be very unhappy with the system.

[DrNefario]

We've been around in circles now, haven't we?

I'll just add that part of the reason I bought my first dedicated e-reader was that I knew the DRM was cracked. I have never actually removed DRM from anything, but the knowledge that I could was part of what swung it. (And I wonder if Amazon knows that? Like the DVD players that could be played multi-region with a remote-control combination, I wonder if there is some tacit acceptance that some people will actually consider that when deciding whether to buy.)

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

We've been around in circles now, haven't we?

I'll just add that part of the reason I bought my first dedicated e-reader was that I knew the DRM was cracked. I have never actually removed DRM from anything, but the knowledge that I could was part of what swung it. (And I wonder if Amazon knows that? Like the DVD players that could be played multi-region with a remote-control combination, I wonder if there is some tacit acceptance that some people will actually consider that when deciding whether to buy.)

Bear in mind that the DRM system could be changed at any time. I advise removing the DRM from your ebooks as soon as you can, just in case.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

We've been around in circles now, haven't we?

I'll just add that part of the reason I bought my first dedicated e-reader was that I knew the DRM was cracked.

Me too. In fact what first brought me to MR was looking to find out if that were so while I was deciding between a Nook or a Kindle.

ApK

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

There are several examples here at Mobileread of "I wouldn't have bought that book if it had DRM."

There aren't any "I would've bought it if it had DRM, but since it doesn't, I skipped it."

Granted, MR is not a representative sample. However, there *is* evidence that non-DRM'd books sell to people who won't buy DRM; there is no evidence for the reverse.

I completely agree that DRM does have a negative effect on sales, but to counter the negative effect there is the positive effect of preventing casual sharing. Where we lack evidence, from either side, is how these two effects weigh in the balance. Publishers may have such evidence, or may not, but certainly I have seen nothing on the various threads here that is convincing.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by gmw

I completely agree that DRM does have a negative effect on sales, but to counter the negative effect there is the positive effect of preventing casual sharing.

It's debatable how "positive" the prevention of casual sharing is. Casual sharing is how most of us discovered our favorite authors.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

It's debatable how "positive" the prevention of casual sharing is. Casual sharing is how most of us discovered our favorite authors.

Exactly that. Though it only happened for me with pbooks so far (quite some time ago so there had been no ebook).

A friend of mine once lent me a trilogy. I loved the story so much that I bought that trilogy for myself, but her next trilogy, bought all of her short story books and other series as well... I have almost all of her books by now, except for a few non fiction books (not interested in the topics). I even bought some of the paper books I already had in ebook form, and more than one of her books to give as gifts.

By now she's a publisher herself and I have not only bought her books but a few books from several other authors she has published.

I doubt I would have bought the first series and gotten to know her and the other authors if I hadn't read the books shared by my friend.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

It's debatable how "positive" the prevention of casual sharing is. Casual sharing is how most of us discovered our favorite authors.

I thought debating it was exactly what we'd been doing . Lack of evidence as to the relative sizes of the effects was the point of my post. Note too that there seems to be an almost unquestioned assumption that everyone understands copyright and IP, in my experience this is simply not true. From what I have seen, especially on the Internet, if people can copy things easily many appear to do so without ever considering whether they are doing anything wrong. DRM at least forces them to be aware of the issue.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by gmw

Note too that there seems to be an almost unquestioned assumption that everyone understands copyright and IP, in my experience this is simply not true. From what I have seen, especially on the Internet, if people can copy things easily many appear to do so without ever considering whether they are doing anything wrong. DRM at least forces them to be aware of the issue.

That is an interesting point.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by gmw

I thought debating it was exactly what we'd been doing . Lack of evidence as to the relative sizes of the effects was the point of my post. Note too that there seems to be an almost unquestioned assumption that everyone understands copyright and IP, in my experience this is simply not true. From what I have seen, especially on the Internet, if people can copy things easily many appear to do so without ever considering whether they are doing anything wrong. DRM at least forces them to be aware of the issue.

The internet encourages easy copying--see, I quoted your words here, without your direct consent.

Posting an excerpt and a link to news articles is common on much of the web. There's no nice sharp line that indicates how much is acceptable, and when the quoting veers into infringement... the A.P. tried to license quotes as small as 5 words, implying they believed that those would be infringing if not paid for.

• Downloading ebook I bought onto my reader: obviously legal.
• Downloading ebook I bought onto my husband's reader so I can read while mine is recharging: probably legal.
• Giving husband's reader back to him without deleting book: who knows, but nobody sensible thinks this is a problem.
• Repeat same process with friend's ereader: nobody knows.

• Downloading onto my computer: Legal.
• Allowing several friends to read whatever ebooks they want on my computer: who knows.

• Downloading my collection onto a memory card in my reader: Legal.
• Giving the memory card to a friend when I'm done with those books: ebookstores would say "illegal," but I haven't made any unauthorized copies.

Copyright law is a *mess* right now. It wasn't designed to deal with easy-instant copies, and it assumes that if you legitimately acquired a copy, you can legitimately transfer ownership, temporarily or permanently, to someone else.

Authors need to stop worrying about "who has an unauthorized copy" and focus on "how can I get more people to buy my books?" The idea of casual sharing somehow being the bane of sales is so mind-boggling that most people can't even imagine it--they assume the purpose of DRM is to block widespread public distribution, because they all know that sharing books is how authors get new fans.

I'm not sure what authors think is going to fill that niche for them if they've got DRM to block it. Amazon's popularity lists, so they only get customers from one store? Sample chapters that only indicate if the author can make a good setting, not if they can tell a complete story?

Where are the high sales numbers for any author whose works aren't pirated?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I'm not sure what authors think is going to fill that niche for them if they've got DRM to block it. Amazon's popularity lists, so they only get customers from one store? Sample chapters that only indicate if the author can make a good setting, not if they can tell a complete story?

I need to play devil's advocate here.

Sharing is one way that authors get new fans, not the only way, and sharing of pbooks does not result from the easy duplication afforded by ebooks which legitimately does raise the likelihood of negating a sale because getting an infringing copy for free was the easiest of all options.

Customers from only Amazon could be enough to let any author retire comfortably, and Amazon's shopping experience, samples, recommendation, one-click buying, etc, could easily make up for the losses from sharing.
Plus add in B&N, Kobo and (blech) iBooks.

"How can I get more people to buy my books?" can potentially be answered in part with "By not letting quite so many of the customers get it for free quite so easily."

It is a fact that many authors who sell ebooks with DRM, even some with Amazon exclusives, do very well. The Kindle ecosystem is working. It's bringing in readers and selling books. Same with the Nook. The arguments in your post above will not sway authors, in the face of that reality. I fear they may even do more harm than good.