Quote:
Originally Posted by Mivo
Removing it requires you to break the law, though. Does that matter on a practical level? No, not really, and that is why it's a farce. But circumventing copy protection essentially makes you (collective "you": us) a criminal. That's my issue with DRM, that it "forces" me to break the law in order to do something that I "should" be able to do: reading my purchased books on any of my reading devices, if I hypothetically wanted to do that. (  )
BM's point was that DRM means that you don't really "own" an e-book you buy, only a license to read it, and with specific conditions that could be changed. Amazon can remove the book from your device. Will they? Extremely unlikely. But should they be able to do that after you paid money? |
You are breaking the law if you are driving 51 in a 50 km/h zone. Breaking DRM (which isn't even illegal in many places for personal use) is a similarly "evil" offense. I understand what you are saying and generally agree with it. But since I can read what I want on the device I want and archive my ebooks I prefer this option to not getting the books I want just to take a stand. Call me pragmatic, I wouldn't buy ebooks if I couldn't remove DRM. Amazon can remove the books from a Kindle (if you sync with the server!), not from my Kobo. But even if I had a Kindle I could just reload the books I have removed the DRM from.
Now those that actually had the "1984" book removed from their Kindles got a pretty sweet deal. Anyway, blame the publishers, not Amazon for DRM.