Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
Wow, get melodramatic much? 
This is no more a "flagrant money-grubbing" move than B&N publishing paper versions of public domain books.
I might add that you're using their bandwidth to retrieve the books, so I don't have a problem with paying a nominal fee for a PD-published book. Heck, I'll even purposely pay for a PD e-book if it has an advantage over freely available versions -- e.g. a well-done TOC, quality formatting, collecting all the works of an author and so forth.
So, go to Gutenberg or Manybooks.
There is absolutely no requirement for anyone publishing any public domain book to do so in a non-DRM manner. None, nada, zip zero zilch.
It's not like B&N putting DRM on a public domain book in any way, shape or form stops people from getting PD books from any other source. So, I really fail to see the problem here. |
I do. I go to Feedbooks for most of my PD books. The article and my 'melodrama' is about DRM and the intrusive nature of a technology that doesn't work, and in this case, is being placed upon public domain articles of culture, therefore disallowing the sharing of said culture. It goes against everything the Public Domain stands for, what it is designed for and what it is needed for. How can you not see something wrong in this?
I suppose you see nothing wrong with Disney's everlasting copyright on Mickey Mouse? Or the sneaky trademarking of authors names and characters to stop said authors' works going into the PD?
And yes, you're right, there's no 'requirement' under law, but there is a cultural conscience that even the lowest of the low companies might want follow. Placing a lock on something that has been freed is a terrible and shameful act.