Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
The fundamental issue is that the mechanism to lend them "in the same manner" doesn't exist. You'd need to have some means of ensuring that the lender couldn't read the book while it was lent to the borrower, and that the borrower could no longer read the book at the end of the loan period. Without that, it wouldn't be a loan at all - you'd simply be giving the recipient a copy of the book. These are exactly the same issues that prevent the re-sale of digital content.
|
As DiapDealer said, you can do the same with pbooks as well, and there is even a longstanding tradition of exactly that.
Why, precisely, is there any objective need for any such mechanism to exist?
You are incredibly willing to accept that DeDRMing books for your own use (thus creating illegal
copies 
) is perfectly all right... despite that DRM is the mechanism by which rights-holders attempt to forcibly keep consumers on the straight and narrow. You have determined that Joe Consumer is trustworthy enough that you, HarryT, can say "screw the rights-holders, and screw the law -- Joe here is an honest man".
However, when it comes to lending, you are not willing to likewise accept that honest individuals exist, who can keep to the straight and narrow all by themselves. You insist that lending cannot and will not be morally acceptable unless the rights-holders are able to control the loan. You have suddenly decided "Joe here is an evil-minded deviant! Oh noes! Pile on the DRM and make sure the feds keep their eyes on him!"
Why the double standard?
Why the judgment?
Why the hypocrisy?