Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
It's different because one activity is legal, and the other isn't. You may not consider it immoral to copy eBooks and give those copies to your friends, but it's certainly not legal, and DRM is there precisely because there are people who see nothing wrong in doing it. If people obeyed the law, there would be no need for DRM.
|
So whether or not something is legal makes all the difference? You must have some very shifty ethics, then. The law is not exactly static. I wonder, if you'd lived during the time of alcohol prohibition in the US, if your opinion would have suddenly flipped as soon as it was repealed.
And by the way, according to the law, it's ok to break DRM if you are visually impaired.
I don't share with my friends, really. I recommend books but I've never sent them a copy of anything I paid for - most of my ebooks are freebies or public domain.
However, I will say that I'd be much less tempted to send them my books (all liberated, regardless of how they started) if it weren't for DRM. It's easier to tell someone to go buy something when you know the whole product is good. But that's not the case with DRM'ed ebooks. I know the product is bad - broken in fact - and that it will cause them problems down the line. It's hard for me to recommend that in good conscience.