Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
THe publishers who read the balance sheets and have the inside info about the industry and who are directly responsible of financial success of their companies think that DRM is necessary at this time and is well worth the investment. You -who have no access to the financial records of the companies and have no responsibility to the authors and employees of the publishing houses-want them to abandon DRM.
At this point I'm going to have to go with guys with the inside info and the responsibility. They may be dead wrong, but that's the way to bet.
|
They
are dead wrong, IMO. The next ten years will show which of us is right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
I notice that no one even WANTS to consider a middle way-a better DRM. But then, ideological purists do tend to scorn the middle way. Oh well.
|
The best DRM at the moment is B&N's system, which at least doesn't rely on a central server to authorise the use of ebooks on new devices. But it still sucks if you want to convert to a different format, or read on a device that doesn't have B&N's reading software.
I can't imagine any DRM system that doesn't impose unreasonable restrictions on the use of the digital files to which it's applied.
Well, one. 'Social' DRM, where the purchaser's name is put into metadata in the ebook, along with useful stuff like date of purchase, and from whom the book was purchased. But with no other restrictions or encryption.
I would not object to such a system. In fact, I would find it very useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
OK, I think we're done here. Good discussion guys.
|
You have consistently misunderstood and misrepresented my position on the effect of DRM on unauthorised copying. You might not agree with me, but it would be nice to find out that you've actually understood the argument.