MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - People who want no DRM are impractical dreamers...

stonetools · 03-22-2011, 10:24 AM

And I'm back. Guess you missed me

I've been busy splitting time between meetings with Apple and the Big Six publishers, of course. That takes up a lot of time. And oh yeah , also posting at "my" blog.....You guys should adjust your tin foil hats, they're getting a bit tight

OK, what we have learned ?
We've learned that publishers believe they need DRM not because piracy-a popular meme round these parts-but because they fear large scale "casual sharing." Elfmark- one of the few beacons of rationality around here- admits that this is a danger, although he believes it will not happen. His admission is telling as he is an anti DRM absolutist, refusing to buy any DRMED work.
Elfwreck does not really say why he thinks large scale casual sharing will not happen. As far as I can see, casual sharing of news articles is done on the Internet for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Sharing of a non DRMED book would be almost as easily done, and if the book was popular, I can't see why it WOULDN'T done. THe scenario I have in mind would be if the next installment of the Twilight Saga was sold non DRM . What is the likelihood that Twilight besotted teenage girls would buy the book and share it with their Facebook friends, who would share it with their Facebook friends, etc. IMO, the likelihood of that would approach 100 percent. Even Stevie Wonder would see the probability of that. (I'm emphasizing Facebook here, because while most folks don't know anything about Darknet and torrents, even Grandma knows about Facebook these days).
The refusal of the anti DRM folk to admit that possibility shows that they have idealogical blinders on. The Mobile Read idealogy is that publishers are evil, greedy, capitalist dinosaurs who eat puppies for breakfast, so they can't possibly be right about this issue, but IMO they seem right about the danger of large scale casual sharing. I'm willing to be hear argument on this, but what I've heard is "PUBLISHERS EVUUL!!! DRM EVUUL!!! YOU EVUUL BECAUSE YOU MUST WORK FOR PUBLISHERS!!!" I'm not impressed by such blathering.
Maybe someone here can do better.
I was kind of hoping that we could move beyond the Manichean dichotomy between DRM as it exists now and no DRM. I would say that could be a third way-toward a "better DRM" -a DRM scheme, that while taking the publisher's concerns into consideration, would allow a migration path for those who want to switch devices, for example. Unfortunately, the discussion here hasn't reached that stage yet. Oh well...

03-22-2011, 10:24 AM	#271
stonetools Wizard Posts: 2,016 Karma: 2838487 Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Washington, DC Device: Ipad, IPhone	And I'm back. Guess you missed me I've been busy splitting time between meetings with Apple and the Big Six publishers, of course. That takes up a lot of time. And oh yeah , also posting at "my" blog.....You guys should adjust your tin foil hats, they're getting a bit tight OK, what we have learned ? We've learned that publishers believe they need DRM not because piracy-a popular meme round these parts-but because they fear large scale "casual sharing." Elfmark- one of the few beacons of rationality around here- admits that this is a danger, although he believes it will not happen. His admission is telling as he is an anti DRM absolutist, refusing to buy any DRMED work. Elfwreck does not really say why he thinks large scale casual sharing will not happen. As far as I can see, casual sharing of news articles is done on the Internet for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Sharing of a non DRMED book would be almost as easily done, and if the book was popular, I can't see why it WOULDN'T done. THe scenario I have in mind would be if the next installment of the Twilight Saga was sold non DRM . What is the likelihood that Twilight besotted teenage girls would buy the book and share it with their Facebook friends, who would share it with their Facebook friends, etc. IMO, the likelihood of that would approach 100 percent. Even Stevie Wonder would see the probability of that. (I'm emphasizing Facebook here, because while most folks don't know anything about Darknet and torrents, even Grandma knows about Facebook these days). The refusal of the anti DRM folk to admit that possibility shows that they have idealogical blinders on. The Mobile Read idealogy is that publishers are evil, greedy, capitalist dinosaurs who eat puppies for breakfast, so they can't possibly be right about this issue, but IMO they seem right about the danger of large scale casual sharing. I'm willing to be hear argument on this, but what I've heard is "PUBLISHERS EVUUL!!! DRM EVUUL!!! YOU EVUUL BECAUSE YOU MUST WORK FOR PUBLISHERS!!!" I'm not impressed by such blathering. Maybe someone here can do better. I was kind of hoping that we could move beyond the Manichean dichotomy between DRM as it exists now and no DRM. I would say that could be a third way-toward a "better DRM" -a DRM scheme, that while taking the publisher's concerns into consideration, would allow a migration path for those who want to switch devices, for example. Unfortunately, the discussion here hasn't reached that stage yet. Oh well...