ePub becomes the official IDPF standard!

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

The tired comparison between drm and locks/bank vaults which is such a dear for anyone defending drm (heard it 3-4 times before at least, maybe more); leaving aside the insulting premise that anyone wanting drm-free books is equivalent to someone wanting free access to other people's house, money and so on, the bottom line is that drm in e-books has been soundly rejected by people voting with their wallets...

Actually, had you bothered to read what I wrote instead of immediately repeating the same thing that I've already read hundreds and hundreds of times, you would have noticed that I didn't make such a comparison. I fully understand the conceptual difference between DRM/copy-protection and locks. I have for twenty years. I was involved in this subject back when it involved CP schemes for 5.25" floppies. We're actually on the same side of this particular issue, but you're so eager to pounce that you haven't noticed. Anyone who questions anything is immediately shouted down as a pawn of the evil DRM conspiracy monster.

My statement had nothing to do with the comparison between DRM and locks, and everything to do with why publishers will never listen to the loudest voices in the anti-DRM crowd. Screaming unreasoned dogma at people never makes them listen. Assuming you know what they're thinking and responding to that, instead of to what they actually say, never makes them listen. Belittling people who are actually on your side because you don't understand what they wrote, never helps your cause.

Now, on to the bloody point.

It has been stated repeatedly that because DRM can not achieve its stated goal, that its real purpose is something else. At least when rlauzon wrote it upthread it was in the form of "that's why we say that the real goal...." so it doesn't look like there's supposed to be some direct causal link between "can't achieve" and "real goal is". The problem is that even in this form, it still doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Almost nothing achieves its stated goal, especially if that goal is stated in terms of absolutes. To say that because X can't achieve its stated goal, it's real goal must be something else lends no weight to the argument against DRM, especially if the arguer gets to choose that something else. It also assumes knowledge of the goals of the person using "X" in the first place. Specifically relating to DRM, a publisher's goal might be anything from "to stop piracy" to "stop casual piracy" to "slow piracy down long enough to make a couple of sales" to "to make a statement that we don't want it pirated, even though some people will anyway."

That leads to the second problem. It assumes that a widely disparate industry is somehow a single-minded monolith. Publishers make the decision as to whether or not to sell e-books directly, sell them through a single DRM-laden distributor, sell through multiple distributors (each with or without DRM), or not to sell them at all. Authors who retain their e-rights have all those same decisions, as well as the additional choice of whether or not to go with a publisher whose e-book choices are known. E-book retailers also get to choose which e-books they're going to sell depending on the DRM-choices of the author, publisher, and distributor.

The only way it would make sense for "vendor lock-in" to be the real goal of DRM would be if a single entity were acting as publisher, DRM vendor, and e-book vendor. Right now, the closest thing to that would be Sony. They're not acting as publisher, but they are acting as a single source vendor for a particular DRMed format and the hardware that supports it.

MobiPocket is acting as a combination DRM vendor, distributor, and retailer. Vendor lock-in would be of value to them, if by "vendor" we mean "DRM vendor". They make a cut off of every DRM book sold through their retailer network or their Web site. However, they can't be too interested in vendor lock-in, or they would have negotiated exclusive e-rights with the publishers, instead of allowing someone like Sony to negotiate their own deal in their own format. If an exclusive arrangement is too expensive, then the publishers can't be too interested in vendor lock-in, either, otherwise they would have made it affordable enough to achieve that goal.

Also, the term "vendor lock-in" becomes hopelessly muddled as soon as someone points out that you can buy DRMed MobiPocket books from a lot of sources and read them on a lot of hardware. It means DRM-vendor in that case, but no one's going to take the time to dig down far enough to understand that's what is meant. They're just going to write argument off and walk away.

[andym]

Sensible and thoughtful contribution. Jason

[nekokami]

Jason, I think you've made some very good points, but I also think Sony and Microsoft are interested in some kind of vendor lock-in, even though I agree that Mobipocket isn't. (So was Apple, no matter what Jobs is saying these days.) So I think it's fair to characterize one of the possible purposes of DRM as "vendor lock-in," depending on the vendor.

From the other side of the publishing fence, I think DRM vendors are quite interested in "vendor lock-in" or at least "vendor predominance" among publishers, who are, after all, the customers of the DRM vendors.

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by nekokami

Jason, I think you've made some very good points, but I also think Sony and Microsoft are interested in some kind of vendor lock-in, even though I agree that Mobipocket isn't. (So was Apple, no matter what Jobs is saying these days.) So I think it's fair to characterize one of the possible purposes of DRM as "vendor lock-in," depending on the vendor.

From the other side of the publishing fence, I think DRM vendors are quite interested in "vendor lock-in" or at least "vendor predominance" among publishers, who are, after all, the customers of the DRM vendors.

I totally agree, especially in the cases of Sony, Microsoft, and Apple.

So far, the Sony business model is virtually identical to Apple's iPod model. Locking people in to BBeB for the big publisher titles while leaving a back door open for other sources of content is an essential part of that game plan.

Microsoft's game plan has always been platform lock-in. That's what was behind the whole "works with Windows" certification program. Let's face it, when you sell OS software, your business plan is based on getting as many people to use it as possible. The same goes for DRM vendors like MobiPocket. The format/DRM combination is the functional equivalent of an OS platform, at least in business model terms.

I sincerely believe that the way in which these arguments are presented is important. It's already been demonstrated that this board is watched by many of the players in the e-book industry. That means that this community stands a real chance of influencing what is still a young industry. If it starts looking like Slashdot, that chance will evaporate the same way Slashdot's influence has.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

Actually, had you bothered to read what I wrote instead of immediately repeating the same thing that I've already read hundreds and hundreds of times, you would have noticed that I didn't make such a comparison. I fully understand the conceptual difference between DRM/copy-protection and locks. I have for twenty years. I was involved in this subject back when it involved CP schemes for 5.25" floppies. We're actually on the same side of this particular issue, but you're so eager to pounce that you haven't noticed. Anyone who questions anything is immediately shouted down as a pawn of the evil DRM conspiracy monster.

I apologize for misunderstanding the original comment; however the comparison between drm and locks/vaults has been made explicitly at least 3 or 4 times in various posts (maybe here, maybe on e-book community - cannot remember for sure) by people who clearly stated they want drm, drm is useful and so on. Again I apologize for lumping this post with those, but I am so tired of all these arguments and the ones about e-book prices...

[mogui]

. . . and about PDF

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

... I am so tired of all these arguments and the ones about e-book prices...

I totally understand that sentiment -- I've mostly stopped reading posts on the subject. There's so rarely any fresh ideas aired on it.

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

I apologize for misunderstanding the original comment

No, I should apologize for jumping harder than I should have. I pulled out the baseball bat when a simple "excuse me" would have sufficed. I'm just overly sensitive to being told what I'm thinking.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

No, I should apologize for jumping harder than I should have. I pulled out the baseball bat when a simple "excuse me" would have sufficed. I'm just overly sensitive to being told what I'm thinking.

My thanks to both of you for your restraint and civility!

So... how long before we see an ePub capable plugin? One thing about PDF -- Acrobat Reader is installed just about everywhere.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by NatCh

I totally understand that sentiment -- I've mostly stopped reading posts on the subject. There's so rarely any fresh ideas aired on it.

I still read them.Just in case someone has something fresh enough to say. I just don't reply as much.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I still read them.Just in case someone has something fresh enough to say. I just don't reply as much.

By mostly stopped, I guess I mean I skim them very lightly, and that's mainly folks who haven't heavily commented on the matter before. So, yeah, same here.

Originally Posted by nekokami

My thanks to both of you for your restraint and civility!

Here, here!

[Hadrien]

Originally Posted by nekokami

My thanks to both of you for your restraint and civility!

So... how long before we see an ePub capable plugin? One thing about PDF -- Acrobat Reader is installed just about everywhere.

Plugin ? There's already Adobe Digital Editions and FBReader with epub support (although it's still a very limited support in FBReader).

[NatCh]

I think I read somewhere that DE was going to be the new free "Acrobat Reader" app from here on. Which would be nice just for the name separation it would give the products. Unless Adobe goes and does something dumb, like calling their DE creator app "Digital Editions" as well.

[nekokami]

I meant a browser plugin. Will DE read PDF files as well? I wouldn't want to have to install two plugins...

[Hadrien]

Originally Posted by nekokami

I meant a browser plugin. Will DE read PDF files as well? I wouldn't want to have to install two plugins...

PDF is supported too.