Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
I want to be clear that I am advocating changing the purpose of DRM.
|
You are proposing nothing of the sort. You are still saying that DRM is used to "protect" content from "piracy" by locking the content up. You are still treating the reader as an attacker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
It would be a universal standard available to authors to use to gain compensation for their works.
|
Then it cannot work because you've given the people who would pirate the content the diagram of the lock, and the key.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
An author would use a public key while the reader would use a private key tied to an account on a server. Some open-source genius could write this protection mechanism in a week. All books under this system would be freely available peer-to-peer.
|
The reader MUST have the private key in order to unlock the content so you can read it. The reader is a "universal standard". Therefore, the key can be recovered from reader. So we are back to "not protected."
The only way to "protect" content is to not make a "universal standard" and keep the method of locking up the content closed and proprietary. Which locks readers into a particular piece of software.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
rlauzon, your concerns are valid when applied to the current system, but I am wondering if your statistical references can be applied to a new standard.
|
What new standard? You've proposed none.
You are either using a "universal standard" which is removed from the content 10 seconds after its published.
Or you are using a closed standard, which locks you into a reader (or, like most DRM, is broken 30 seconds after the content is published).
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
Try looking at this from the point of view of the writer.
|
This is not a writer issue. We've already proven that those authors who have good content get rewarded. Those who don't, don't.
DRM does not benefit writers. DRM only makes publishers feel better. DRM 1) makes eBooks cost more, 2) makes eBooks less useful to readers and 3) eventually pisses off readers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
What if the new author could self-encrypt his work and put it on one or more peer-to-peer networks?
|
By encrypting his work, he is limiting the number of people who can read his work. So he's simply shooting himself in the foot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogui
He could allow a free read of the first X pages (he decides) to help his marketing.
|
He can do that easier by simply releasing the first X pages in an unencrypted format - just like John Scalzi did with The Android Dream.