MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Requiem · 08-05-2009, 11:45 AM

So my question, is if B&N had printed these works you wuld expect them to give it away for free? Eventhough there is more costs to making a Published work, that does not mean there is no cost in editing, formatting and distributing a PD item. The DRM is currently the best way that the company can secure THEIR work on the public domain. The words may be free but no one works without getting paid. And those books you speak about were formatted and distibuted by someone.

The issue of DRM is not about the actual technology but rather how the companies that use it are implementing it. There is bad DRM (Apple, Kindle, etc.) and others that have very good policies about it. Here is a freedom of choice, as you can choose not to purchase anything from a company that goes against your views. It is easy to just move on to another company that does not have the issues that you are stressing. (BTW there has been DRM on PD books on the Sony Store since the beginning and all they did was add a bland cover)

I don't like the current implementation of DRM either, but I do understand the business side of things. Take for example a book that costs $2 to format and distribute, the company slaps DRM on it, effectively preventing 80% of people from redistributing it in their form, (20% illegally distributing) Say they sell 200,000 copies. Of those 200,000 only 160,000 actually cost 2$ and the other 40K cost an exponentially higher rate due to piracy. Maybe those 40,000 got distributed just 10 times each. That means that the company lost $800,000 they could have made off of THEIR work to format and edit the document. Now without DRM say that rate would be much higher, say now they only prevented 50% of people from pirating THEIR part of the work. You are now looking at the loss of millions of dollars. Companies put on DRM even if it only keeps 10% of the people from pirating, because that is what meets their bottom line and keeps the workers gainfully employed.

We want our public domain works protected, they want their jobs protected. Would you rather that they lock up the copyright in such schemes as have been previously mentioned (Trademarking names, etc) Or would you rather they make their money and distribute books at the lowest possible cost rather than having to pay licensing fees?

Google is also born of capitalism but they are distributing some of the greatest works ever written with no direct benefit to their bottom line, they are not the goodwill and you shouldn't forget they are still getting money from the advertising on their sites and that is what secures the books for everyone, the money of the companies like B&N who are charging money to pay for advertising to give us the same books free.

Ahhhh I ramble, just find somewhere else to get it.

08-05-2009, 11:45 AM	#42
Requiem Enthusiast Posts: 42 Karma: 490328 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: USA Device: Asus Transformer	So my question, is if B&N had printed these works you wuld expect them to give it away for free? Eventhough there is more costs to making a Published work, that does not mean there is no cost in editing, formatting and distributing a PD item. The DRM is currently the best way that the company can secure THEIR work on the public domain. The words may be free but no one works without getting paid. And those books you speak about were formatted and distibuted by someone. The issue of DRM is not about the actual technology but rather how the companies that use it are implementing it. There is bad DRM (Apple, Kindle, etc.) and others that have very good policies about it. Here is a freedom of choice, as you can choose not to purchase anything from a company that goes against your views. It is easy to just move on to another company that does not have the issues that you are stressing. (BTW there has been DRM on PD books on the Sony Store since the beginning and all they did was add a bland cover) I don't like the current implementation of DRM either, but I do understand the business side of things. Take for example a book that costs $2 to format and distribute, the company slaps DRM on it, effectively preventing 80% of people from redistributing it in their form, (20% illegally distributing) Say they sell 200,000 copies. Of those 200,000 only 160,000 actually cost 2$ and the other 40K cost an exponentially higher rate due to piracy. Maybe those 40,000 got distributed just 10 times each. That means that the company lost $800,000 they could have made off of THEIR work to format and edit the document. Now without DRM say that rate would be much higher, say now they only prevented 50% of people from pirating THEIR part of the work. You are now looking at the loss of millions of dollars. Companies put on DRM even if it only keeps 10% of the people from pirating, because that is what meets their bottom line and keeps the workers gainfully employed. We want our public domain works protected, they want their jobs protected. Would you rather that they lock up the copyright in such schemes as have been previously mentioned (Trademarking names, etc) Or would you rather they make their money and distribute books at the lowest possible cost rather than having to pay licensing fees? Google is also born of capitalism but they are distributing some of the greatest works ever written with no direct benefit to their bottom line, they are not the goodwill and you shouldn't forget they are still getting money from the advertising on their sites and that is what secures the books for everyone, the money of the companies like B&N who are charging money to pay for advertising to give us the same books free. Ahhhh I ramble, just find somewhere else to get it.