[Worldwalker]

Here's another way to look at the question:

What color dog do we, the posters in this thread, have in this hunt? In other words, why do we oppose DRM?

Is it because DRM inhibits our ability to buy what we want to buy? Not in the least. I could go to Amazon this moment and buy any ebook they sell.

Is it because DRM inhibits our ability to use what we buy in the way we want to use it? Not in the least. I could strip the DRM off that ebook and do whatever I want with it.

Is it because DRM inhibits our ability to get or give ebooks illegally? Not in the least. I know how to use Google too.

While DRM has affected some of us in the past, there is not a single person in this thread that I've seen who expects DRM to hamper them in the future; the ones who were affected in the past learned from the experience, and the ones who weren't learned from other people's experiences. DRM is not going to interfere with our ability to obtain or use any ebook whatsoever. So whatever dog we have in this hunt, "DRM is going to hurt me personally" is not it.

Now, consider also the fact that we're not just readers but voracious readers. I would venture to guess that any person here reads more ebooks, or more books in general, than any ten "ordinary" people. It is in our best interest for there to be a continuing, and increasing, supply of books for us to read. Even for people who read primarily public domain books, an increase in overall ebook readership means a greater interest in PD books, and hence more people volunteering for PG, the Distributed Proofreading project, etc., and therefore more and better PD ebooks. There is nobody in this discussion who would benefit in any way if book authors became unable to make a living writing books, and therefore no new ebooks were available. I say again: nobody.

There are people who would like to see the book industry as a whole fail. They're the people who are in competition with it: the sellers of movie tickets, the manufacturers of fancy clothes, the owners of night clubs ... all the people whose products are competing with books for consumers' entertainment dollars. Those people are not us. We're the ones who want the books.

Also, we are not idiots. We are not fools. We are not stupid. We are aware of our reliance on the book industry. We know we want books, more books, additional books, and a few extra books besides. We're the people who were derided for being "bookworms" in school. We're the people whose relatives gave up on Christmas presents long ago and just give us bookstore gift cards. We're the people who can't do anything in our houses without moving the books out of the way first. Even those of us who write for a living can't write as fast as we can read. We utterly depend on authors to write books for us, and we're fully aware of that fact.

So, given the facts in evidence -- that we rely on the book industry, that we are aware of that reliance, and that we are not stupid -- why would so many of us be advocating something which would be totally, utterly, and completely contrary to our own interests?

Remember, the existence of DRM does not harm our interests personally; we can circumvent DRM, or find people to do it for us. If you really want to put it that way, we are the "technorati" who can get any book they want DRM-free, and if we were in favor of distributing ebooks without paying for them, everyone we know could also get any ebook they want through us. Whatever dog we have in this hunt, it's not that one.

So why would we advocate hurting ourselves?

Either we don't rely on the book industry, we're unaware that we rely on the book industry, or we're bloody stupid. Since I have disproved all three of those assertions, and everyone else in this thread is evidence of the same, then the only possible conclusion is that we don't advocate hurting ourselves -- that, in fact, what we advocate is something that would be beneficial to ourselves.

How would DRM-free ebooks benefit us?

Would we be able to buy ebooks that we can't buy now? Aside from the weirdos like me who refuse to buy DRM-locked ebooks, no. Not a one. We can already buy any ebook we want.

Would we be able to use ebooks in a way that we can't use them now? No. Every person in this thread can strip DRM or knows someone who can do it. For us, ebooks are already effectively DRM-free.

Would we be able to get free ebooks that we have to pay for now? No. We can all use Google. If we are willing to download illegal ebooks, it doesn't matter if they shipped without DRM or that DRM was stripped by the person who put them on the darknet. They're still available exactly the same way to us.

So what's the difference?

The long-term health of the book industry.

Yes, we want authors and distributors of books to thrive. We don't want this from some diffuse altruistic motive -- we want it for a very simple, straightforward reason: we want them to write books for us. We need those books. We need those books like an addict needs his drug. When we hear Thomas Jefferson's line "I cannot live without books," we wonder who could. We need our books, and the sources of those books. And, not being stupid, we know authors are not going to be able to write books for us if they have to work digging ditches. If we want them to write books, we know they need to be able to make money from books.

Other people may be stupid. The posters in this thread on MobileRead are not. Other people may prefer forms of entertainment that are not books. The posters in this thread on MobileRead do not. Other people may not think about where their entertainment comes from, or how to keep it coming in the future. The posters in this thread on MobileRead do.

And I have not yet seen an argument in favor of DRM that would explain why so many of us think it is an anathema which does not presume that we are either malicious, ignorant, or utterly and irredeemably stupid.

That's the dog we have in this hunt: the one that wants ebooks available to feed our addiction, now and in the future. The one that wants authors to write more books so we can read them. The one that, driven by realpolitik, wants to see the book industry thrive so that we can have more ebooks.

That is why your arguments are not working, stonetools. You're arguing as though we wanted to destroy the book industry out of either greed, malice, or stupidity. None of those is true. We don't see ourselves in our arguments, so they pass right by us. Print this out and put it on a little card on your keyboard:

WE WANT MORE BOOKS.

That's really the bottom line.