It's time for a unified ebook format and the end of DRM

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

The thing about EULAs that I have always wondered about:

How can a EULA possibly be a binding contract if you haven't signed it?

Clicking to "yes, I agree" is hardly the same thing as signing an actual contract. Has this issue ever been resolved in a court?

And if it's not a binding contract, then it would seem that a digital purchase is merely a "sale," not a license.

Verbal agreements are binding, with no signature.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Verbal agreements are binding, with no signature.

You are able to click your mouse by saying the word "click"? My mouse simply does not respond to verbal commands...

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

If music revenues are down it is because we consumers now have the ability to buy our music per song and not be stuck buying a more expensive album for one or two songs surrounded by 8 other garbage pieces.

It might be a small loss for record companies, but a win for us consumers. When these companies start finding real talent that can put out albums that all 10 songs are worth purchasing the album for, we will continue only buying the one or two songs we actually like.

Or they need to get out the album mold and just publish good songs, not adding filler to make an album.

That said, there are many top songs that were just done to fill in space originally. Smoke on the Water comes to mind.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

The thing about EULAs that I have always wondered about:

How can a EULA possibly be a binding contract if you haven't signed it?
Clicking to "yes, I agree" is hardly the same thing as signing an actual contract. Has this issue ever been resolved in a court?

Clickthrough agreements have been ruled binding (however, only inasmuch as the agreement is legal: TOS that change without telling the users have been ruled invalid in CA). The current question is whether shrinkwrap agreements are valid--terms you *don't* see before purchase.

This includes both software where the terms are inside the box, and potentially, digital sales on sites where the terms aren't shown at login. (I don't think Kindle users are required to see Amazon's Kindle TOS before buying. They're required to see Amazon's standard TOS, but the ebook-specific terms are pretty well buried.)

[Serpentine]

EULAs don't stand up very well in court, if ever. You're more likely to be punished for fraud (ID theft/impersonation) than actually infringing anything in the EULA, if you were to use someone else's license.

The other thing is that software has provisions for cracking and reversing in many situations, this is mostly in reference to older software, but the case can be made for interoperability of components. At the end of the day the EULA while it may attempt to limit the users rights, it makes no attempt to magically lock the software itself, that is done by the author (and is not always DRM), allowing you to use the software as you wish. Should the software become legacy, there is no real way for the author to disable it remotely. This all changes with install-time DRM schemes... but hey, that's what we're talking about here isn't it?

With content however, should the DRM scheme become broken or unable to authenticate in any way, you are unable to do anything with the content (unless the DRM is weak and you can strip it without requiring the DRM services to still be functioning). This means that content can become broken even on intended devices and services.

In the end it all boils down to the 'I own this book' and 'I lease this book'. Some formats might be better for moving leased books, but you're unlikely to see old-media wanting to sell you files without some lock-in service/hardware.

[sbroome]

I'm having decent early success selling via PDF using paypal's micropayment system.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Its certainly a convenient theory, but many studies say different and attribute the recording industry decline to piracy and casual sharing in large part.

I wonder who paid for those convenient studies...the recording industry perhaps

Competing formats have been part of the tech industry since consumers had to decide between cylinders vs disks for recorded music. Its part of the innovation process. The current situation is no different from 1900,1950,1980 or 2000.

The phonograph was invented in 1877 and went through different sizes until the mass production of the compact cassette music tapes in 1964, Audio CDs didn’t turn up until 1982.

Yes they required totally different technology but they were also TRUE innovations in the world of music reproduction and took DECADES to come into being.

The idiocy of the competing vcr formats had nothing to do with innovation & more about one company wanting to control the entire market. One format wasn’t truly better than the other, any more than SACD is that much better than DVD-A’s.

All these companies have accomplished is fracturing the market dragging down everything to a crawl while the majority of the consumers sit on the sidelines and let the people who have to jump on the latest and greatest gadget fight it out. When the smoke finally clears and prices come down the rest of us go for it.

Shrug. So what? Borders went out of business with no effect on Borders ebook consumers. It all depends on the existing business arrangements at the time. IN the meantime, the only way you can totally avoid ecosystem lock-in is by not buying anything at all.

Of course Borders readers weren’t hurt since Borders had no ereader of their own and supported the epub standard.

I find plenty to buy since I have no problem being patient and picking the best product for my needs that won’t trap me into to just one company/brand thereby limiting my choices.

Its not idiotic if it protects against losses of sales due to casual sharing , and you can't remove DRM from a book that the author doesn't write because she can't make a living writing books!!!

I also don’t give a damn if these so called writers decide not to write anything to be published for fear that their precious work will maybe, possibly, be pirated without drm. They should get so lucky. There will be 100 others to take their places from which I will be able to choose from and at reasonable prices.

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Its certainly a convenient theory, but many studies say different and attribute the recording industry decline to piracy and casual sharing in large part.

Hmm, I wonder. There are also many studies which say otherwise. They prove that persons who use 'piracy' are more inclined to buy music than others. Not all of them of course.
Only, they buy music from 'smaller' bands and artists who they never new without 'piracy'. I agree that the so-called 'big' artists will sell less. But, is that related to 'piracy' or the recycling the same-old same-old over and over again?

The same relates to the movie industry. The complain very heavily, but make more profit every year. Cinema's having more viewers every year. And still they complain about piracy. True, their 'blockbusters' will have lower revenues (actually, a blockbuster should be decided by the public, not the movie company...), but the smaller films generate much more visitors. Same thing as with the music industry, a lot of the 'big' films are the same-old same-old. Visitors don't want that anymore. They rather download it and go to a smaller film which has more content.

Like most big industries, the media industries are very slow in changing and instead of looking and listening to their clientele, they try to bully their clientele into accepting the old method.

[andym]

Originally Posted by DonaldL.

It's time for a unified ebook format and the end of DRM
Quote:
Imagine buying a car that locks you into one brand of fuel. A new BMW, for example, that only runs on BMW gas. There are plenty of BMW gas stations around, even a few in your neighborhood, so convenience isn't an issue. But if one of those other gas stations offers a discount, a membership program, or some other attractive marketing campaign, you can't participate. You're locked in with the BMW gas stations.

But that is exactly the business model that operates in a number of markets: gillette are credited with inventing it - give away the razor and then make your money on the razorblades. The same model operates in the mobile telephony market, pay-TV, computer printers.

Savvier consumers pay extra for an unlocked mobile phone, but that's probably the exception rather than the rule.

There are lots of happy Amazon users out there and it's probably true that Amazon's strategy has given a huge boost to the adoption of ebooks. Whether it's good for the long-term health of the market is another matter.

[cjr72]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

If music revenues are down it is because we consumers now have the ability to buy our music per song and not be stuck buying a more expensive album for one or two songs surrounded by 8 other garbage pieces.

Yep, also the '90s was a boom period for the industry because many were re-buying their music to upgrade from records and cassettes to CDs, I know I did. They were also price fixing during this era which was exposed in '99. Once these things ended revenues naturally fell.

[BillSmithBooks]

My understanding is that the record companies are selling more music than ever before...what's killing them revenue wise is that customers are choosing to buy 99 cent singles instead of $15 albums because as a collective whole we got sick of paying $15 for one or two decent songs and another 8-10 songs of filler.

The obvious solution to customers is to produce more songs I'd like to buy.

The obvious solution to the record companies is to scream piracy.

Study after study has shown that people who fileshare more also buy more music. I also wonder if anybody has dared to compare the incidence of online filesharing vs. the old "sneakerNet" days when people made mix tapes and copied their casettes.

As for DRM on books, I love the quote attributed to Cory Doctorow I read today: "Anybody who believes in ebook DRM has never met a typist."

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

As for DRM on books, I love the quote attributed to Cory Doctorow I read today: "Anybody who believes in ebook DRM has never met a typist."

And I suppose that anyone who believes in music DRM has never seen a microphone (or software that captures input to a sound card).

DRM is a low fence. People who like the thrill of going where they aren't invited will see jumping over the fence as a delightful challenge. But a lot of people will be deterred.

The problem with DRM and popular music is that people who are at the age where music is of greatest interest are also at the age where breaking rules has the greatest appeal. Since readers tend more to be young children and older adults, I think DRM has a better chance of working with books than with music.

Am I sure? No. Sometimes you will hear it claimed that, in certain countries, cheating on taxes is a national pastime, with people of all ages ashamed if they pay what is legally owed. Maybe breaking eBook DRM will become such a national pastime in the US. None of us know for sure.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

... DRM is a low fence. People who like the thrill of going where they aren't invited will see jumping over the fence as a delightful challenge. But a lot of people will be deterred.

It appears to me that more and more people are coming to realize that once a purchased book is in their own home, any “fences” that may be present are optional. They can be removed at their sole discretion.

These many proprietary formats appear to be an attempt at “vendor/device lock in”, and more and more people are starting to see through this. Format shifting is simply a valid way to correct this. Having a standard format would be an advance in my opinion.

Publishers, vendors, and resellers would love to be able to be able to legislate their way around people’s common sense, I just don’t see this as ever being successful.

[twowheels]

Originally Posted by andym

Savvier consumers pay extra for an unlocked mobile phone, but that's probably the exception rather than the rule.

A bit OT, but perhaps you can explain why that's so savvy. As a Verizon customer that's hardly an option, but I choose to stay with Verizon for their better rural coverage since I spend a lot of time in the middle of nowhere.

That said, even if I were an AT&T/T-Mobile/etc customer I don't see the benefit. The carriers don't give you a discount for bringing your own phone. Everybody pays for the subsidies, whether they take advantage of them or not. Sure, I could be grandfathered into an older plan and keep going month to month, but even taking the subsidized phone I remain grandfathered into much older & cheaper plan -- yes I commit myself to two more years, but after more than 10 years with the same carrier I don't see myself changing carriers any time soon...

[ATimson]

Originally Posted by twowheels

That said, even if I were an AT&T/T-Mobile/etc customer I don't see the benefit. The carriers don't give you a discount for bringing your own phone.

T-mobile used to - to get a phone, you paid $10 more /month & signed a 2 year contract. Or you could bring your own (or pay full price), save the $10/month and have no contract.

I haven't checked their plans recently - did they get rid of that?