Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue_librarian
Well, the point they're making (artificially limiting ebooks to mimic physical books as closely as possible, the worst of both worlds, if you will) is a valid one, you may agree with it or not. Calling that "drivel" certainly shows more about what kind of spirit you are than you may realize.
|
It's not valid. He's simply repackaging his "information is free" philosophy. DRM for all it's failings (which are many), is not breaking the ebook, it's ensuring that an ebook isn't FREE. You are not FREE to copy an ebook if the content creator does not wish to provide it for FREE.
Libraries SHOULDN'T have an unlimited lending ability because the books are not FREE. The DRM that limits how many users can take a book out at a time is simply a way for content creators to get paid.
If there were no DRM, and libraries could "lend" out an ebook infinitely, then you'd have one library buy one copy of the book, and everyone else would "borrow" the book from the library. Destroying the economic viability of writing books.
That DRM so far have problems, and that books are pirated anyway does nothing to reduce the credibility of the idea that information is NOT free, nor SHOULD it be free.
Copyright and patents are in place so that society can benefit from folks being able to make a profession out of creating content. Without there being a monetary incentive, we would not have the wealth of content creators that we currently enjoy.
Lee