Quote:
Originally Posted by eschwartz
I've always thought the "no support for library DeDRM" policy was because DeDRM is meant to give you control over your own property.
Just because libraries make it impossible to read a library book without a special app, does not justify helping and encouraging people to DeDRM it and keep it forever.
As HarryT said, you already require specific ereaders (that support Adobe ADEPT).
|
In view of what I am going to say I should make it clear from the outset that I have no problems with the existing attitudes to DRM and library books. I simply think we should revisit the issue if greater restrictions are imposed upon readers. I certainly am not suggesting that it is justified for people to keep a borrowed library book forever without payment to the author. I am suggesting, though, that there
may be circumstances that arise in the future which justify removing DRM from library ebooks to facilitate the reading of that ebook, in the expectation that the reader would not retain the de-drm'd copy. And yes, we all know that not everyone abides by such an honour system. But this is little different than trusting people now to only de-drm ebooks that they own for their own use. To be perfectly frank the issue is a complex one and I haven't made my own mind up about it yet, except to the extent that if it gets to a stage where I can't read a library book on either a Kindle or Kobo because of DRM I personally would feel justified in removing the DRM so that I could. This would not morally justify me keeping that de-drm'd book.
One of the very fundamental problems we have is that neither Authors, Publishers or Readers are all that comfortable with the ramifications of this new product, an EBook. Each try to interpret rights, obligations and even value by analogy to physical books rather than the ebook itself. EBooks are, of course, computer files, and have very different characteristics. They are much cheaper to produce and distribute. Copying is easy, and the marginal cost of a copy is negligible. The potential for piracy is significantly higher. EBooks are not "sold", thereby conferring ownership, but only licensed, sometimes very restrictively. EBooks do not deteriorate with age or with use. An EBook is not "property" at law in the traditional sense, as someone who pirates an ebook does not deprive any other person of the possession of that ebook. A physical book is not subject to the type of restrictions that can be enforced by DRM. These are only some of the characteristics I can think of off the top of my head.
Yet we get publishers who want to charge the same price as for a physical book. We get readers demanding a second hand market for products that do not deteriorate. And all the rest of the lunacies which come from trying to treat an ebook as a physical book. I don't really think ownership is a particularly useful concept here. It is a more distant criterion for asking the question, in this case, about what device or devices one should morally be able to read a borrowed ebook on. Then there is the added complication that even if it is morally okay to remove drm for purposes of reading the book, there is no way to guarantee or enforce the deletion of the de-drm'd copy. And it is certain that at least some will abuse the privilege and keep a copy permanently for which they have not paid the proper price, which is, I suggest, clearly morally wrong. So how much damage would be done? In theory, the market for selling books could be totally destroyed as everyone simply borrows and keeps. Practically, most unlikely. On the other extreme, the effect could be zero, as no one abuses the system.
As I indicated, I have no problem with the present situation. However, I also think that the situation needs to be reviewed at least when major changes occur.