Quote:
Originally Posted by alansplace
You're, IMHO, paraphrasing Jeff Bezos inaccurately. He (according to the article) actually says:
“If the rights owner wants DRM, we do DRM. If the rights owner doesn’t want DRM, we don’t do DRM.”
|
Which leaves out what they do when the rights holder doesn't care. In which case, based on the boiler plate, they take a pro DRM stance.
Allowing the publisher to have the final say in DRM or not is perfectly fine, but when the publisher doesn't care, it'd be much better for consumers if Amazon didn't apply DRM. Their current drm as the default, is not a pro-consumer stance and they've been quite careful whenever they discuss DRM to not mention their default stance is pro DRM unless the publisher requests a non-drm contract.
Quote:
|
IMHO, a person could legitimately imply from the above quote that the "rights owner" is assumed to "want DRM" if they don't state that they don't want DRM.
|
Or that they want drm free if they don't state that they want drm
What the publisher asks for isn't really the issue, Amazon's default stance when the publisher doesn't care, is. However, it's not really a big problem, as long as publisher that don't want DRM can sell their books as easily as those who do on Amazon, then it's a case of pressuring individual publishers.
The most annoying issue imo is when Amazon removed the ability to see which books were DRM free.