Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
....
Adobe can authorize a new device, and un-authorize an old one--why can't their servers shift DRM ownership of a particular ebook to a new device, instead of an entire account at once? Why didn't publishers insist on *that* programming, instead of a new DRM method only usable on a few readers?
They're not doing it for "malice." They're doing it for *greed*--they don't want to allow a secondhand market for ebooks, neither free or sold. They have the technology to make it difficult to hand off an ebook to a friend when you're done, so they implement that, regardless of the consumer's right to resell what they've bought.
...
|
#1 because Adobe does not track on a single book/purchase basis. They only authorize the sale and the seller and consumer tracks the purchase. To allow single ebook ownership would require a centralized system to track every ebook in order to fully implement it and insure that it was being managed properly.
#2 perhaps that is the reasoning they are thinking it is a lost sale and they would actually sell another copy. That may or may be true, but I'll agree it could be the reasoning wrt selling a book but loaning a book should still be of no concern to them other that it would have the potential to sell additional books so you would think that would be pushing for it. (B&N apparently did).