[BoldlyDubious]

Hello BillSmithBooks. Very good points... I'll try and address them.

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

So how big is this theoretical fine?
Because if it is small enough, it would be a simple matter to pass the hate to "liberate" one copy of a book and put it on the torrents and there's nothing the publisher could do about it according to this system (one-time fine and it's over)? (Of course, a solicitation for funds would technically be an illegal conspiracy along the lines of the anti-organized crime laws, but let's play along for arguments' sake.)
If the fine is large enough to prevent that, then the punishment would be so severe as to discourage anyone from ever buying a file, not ulike people being sued by the MAFIAA/RIAA to the point of losing their homes and declaring bankruptcy.

This is a key issue. The fine should be large enough to hurt, but not so large as to terrorize people into adopting a "trust no one!" lifestyle. I am thinking along the lines of "30-50 times the price of the illegally uploaded file".
It's interesting that you use the word "liberate", because it seems to confirm what I think: that today's setup is perceived as so unfair that some people illegally distribute media to "fight" it. Well, with a fair copy-protection scheme (of which mine is only a tentative example) these people would stop.

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I really dislike a proposal that requires everyone in the world to lock up their files like they were firearms with draconian penalties for being...well, not careless, but perhaps well-meaning but inept. Look at how many Windows computers are compromised around the world because people simply don't get the idea of having decent up-to-date anti-virus and firewall. And yet people are expected to ensure that no one else ever accesses their computers to ensure their ebooks and media aren't stolen? This really isn't practical.

Here it seems to me that you are exaggerating. Lock up like firearms? Do you call that having an antivirus and not telling your user password to people you don't know very well? And: do you consider getting a 300dollar/euro fine once in a lifetime a draconian penalty?
Moreover, you seem to think that for everyone of us there's an army of enemies who only waits a mistake of us to intrude into our computers and... stole our media? That's a bit far out, in my view. Yes, this definition is almost correct if you consider people who constantly try and get through our firewalls, but I don't think they are looking for books or music. And for what concerns people with physical access to our unlocked PCs, usually they are family or close friends.
So the risk of getting fined because a media file gets uploaded by someone who "stole" it from us are pretty low, in my view.

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

Plus, imagine the fun some people would have with "Hey, I want to get revenge on this guy, let's set him up by seeding his media files on the web."

Well, this only holds true if the people are your spouse or close friend or mother or son or anyone else so close to you that you trust them enough to let them access your personal files. These people could do much worse that get you fined (once) for illegal distribution of media... such as emptying your bank account, for instance.

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

With file conversion, it would be trivially easy to take out the social watermarking -- convert from any format to plain text, problem solved. With non-DRM files (as are suggested here), there's nothing that can prevent that.

Correct. But plain text is a lower-quality representation of a book compared to the original file (say, in epub format). So, if the price of the "real thing" is reasonable (and this is another key issue in my view) people will go for it instead.

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

Honestly, I would really like a simple solution -- becuase I just want to buy and download my books instead of having DRMd files that I will lose when the vendor goes bankrupt, as is happening with Fictionwise, as happened with Microsoft and WalMart's music files, as happened with Microsoft Reader.
Anyone who buys DRMd files is clearly not paying attention to history...sooner or later, you WILL get screwed.
I have a simple DRM solution -- sell DRM free files at a reasonable price, let people download their files and quit treating paying customers like criminals.
It works for the HumbleBundle, it can work for you.

I completely agree with you. I, too, prefer this solution to my "social DRM" scheme. However, this is a solution that is around from day one, and no big publisher seems to be even considering it, due to the lack of protection against illegal distribution that it seems to offer (in my view protection is offered by people's own honesty, but evidently this is not sufficient to publishers).

My proposal tries to retain most of the advantages of a "no DRM whatsoever" scenario while offering protection to publishers. Maybe this can convince some of them?