[Dave W]

Your comments just reinforce what I am saying, or at least thinking. I didn't mean to imply that software licenses deny ownership, but just limit what that ownership includes. For example, you can only use it on one computer, even if you own several and are the only user. That may not be enforceable, but it is part of the license agreement that you agree to before the software will install. My contention is that ebooks are not software, but merely a different way of publishing a book. So when I buy the ebook, I want to be free to do with that book everything that I could do with a paper book. If DRM is more restrictive, the publishers are "cutting off their noses to spite their faces" to use an old phrase. I really believe that, as long as the restrictions don't go too far, ebooks will catch on and people will do more reading (and buying books) than they do now with paper books. When the publisher prevents you from giving, loaning, or sharing the book, that publisher is actually reducing his market, not increasing it. Also, there is much more incentive for enterprising hackers to break the DRM and distribute illegal copies. After all, it is easy to copy or scan a paper book, but how many will go to that trouble when books sell for a reasonable price or you can borrow a copy from the local library? The same goes for ebooks.

I realize that I'm on my soapbox here, but I hope that if enough of us talk about this, the publishers will take notice. At least I hope so.

Dave W