DRM Good or Bad?

[DrNefario]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If I download an eBook that I was never going to pay for, who have I hurt?

The person whose book you would have bought if you weren't reading that illegal ebook?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You download an ebook that you have no right to get --- for you the end result is exactly the same as for a thief. You wind up with something that doesn't belong to you. It is different from theft only for the copyright owner, for him/her it may or may not be a lost sale.

The answer is nobody. I've hurt nobody. I wasn't going to buy it. I didn't take it such that the author/publisher no longer has it. So really, I've hurt nobody. Yes, it's wrong to do so. But nobody has been hurt.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

The person whose book you would have bought if you weren't reading that illegal ebook?

Not quite. This is a case of I was never going to buy it. So because of that, I've not taken a sale away from the author.

[Lazer]

Here is my take on this thread, (and I'll claim to have stirred the bucket a bit with a post of mine).

This issue is heavily polarized and I doubt beliefs are going to change much. I'm glad the thread was started so I could read (hear) the opposing view. Good to feel the vibes.

For those of you authors that want to DRM your ebooks. Do it. For those of you that don't want your works DRM'd, don't select it.

For those readers that refuse to buy DRM'd books. Don't buy 'em. (Go on a hunger strike while your at it––that last is humor by the way––don't get in a huff, we can still sit down and drink beer and talk books.)

I predict this will all be a mute point down the road. In five years, or so, there will one eBook format and it'll have one extra-nasty DRM. That's what I foresee, like it or not.

[JSWolf]

For authors who feel DRM is the way, let the rest of us strip off the DRM and send the book out into the wild.

For authors who feel DRM is bad thing, let them price the book reasonably so we can then buy it and enjoy it.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The answer is nobody. I've hurt nobody. I wasn't going to buy it. I didn't take it such that the author/publisher no longer has it. So really, I've hurt nobody. Yes, it's wrong to do so. But nobody has been hurt.

So why did you take it if it wasn't worth buying? It is possibly like going up to the little old shoe shine guy and having your shoes shined and then not paying. Or going into a restaurant and not paying or only wanting to pay what the ingredients cost as if the chef and servers skills are worth nothing. Theft of services is what it is called but it is still theft.

It is denigrating the author by implying that the work is not worth anything but still taking that work as if you have a right to so so. Perhaps the author has not been hurt but you definitely have as every act of this type lowers your moral standards just a bit more.

If you really don't want it why bother to take/steal it? The argument is so specious that Giggleton makes way more sense on this issue.

Helen

[JSWolf]

The reason why someone won't pay for something is not relevant. What is relevant is that it's not being paid for and thus, when it's downloaded, nobody loses out.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

If you really don't want it why bother to take/steal it? The argument is so specious that Giggleton makes way more sense on this issue.

He doesn't want it at the price it's being offered at, or -- very likely -- he wants to sample it first in this hypothetical situation.

Has no one here ever checked out a book from the library before deciding whether or not to buy the book? It's not the same thing, because the library presumably paid the author for the copy (unless it was donated as a used book but somebody, somewhere, hundreds or thousands of reads ago bought the book once. Unless it was stolen from the bookstore and donated to the library! But I digress.), but it's ultimately the same concept: I wouldn't read this for $10 but I would read it for free.

There is strong anecdotal evidence linked all over MR that pirates buy a lot. They just don't buy everything they use/sample, and they don't always buy before using it.

I don't pirate, but I understand it. I frequently check books out from the library first before buying.

[John F]

Originally Posted by Lazer

...

I predict this will all be a mute point down the road. In five years, or so, there will one eBook format and it'll have one extra-nasty DRM. That's what I foresee, like it or not.

I disagree, I think people will continue to be just as vocal.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Lazer

I predict this will all be a mute point down the road. In five years, or so, there will one eBook format and it'll have one extra-nasty DRM. That's what I foresee, like it or not.

1) Moot point, not mute point.

2) What, in five years, they'll have destroyed all scanners currently in existence and put sensors on word-processing programs so they can tell if you're typing something copyrighted without permission?

Companies have been attempting to find The Perfect DRM for over 10 years; the end result is that anything that's on the market more than a year gets cracked.

"Extra-nasty" DRM is irrelevant to me; I don't buy--nor download--ebooks that require registration to open. If all commercial ebooks switch to ADE, I won't buy ebooks anymore... I'll buy used print books, chop & scan them.

However, I suspect that authors like Konrath will be active in seeking customers who don't buy DRM. Sites like DriveThruRPG (which is where I bought my last pay-for-it novel to read) aren't likely to add device-registration DRM because most of their business is PDFs and their customers expect to be able to print the charts & tables from the RPG books they buy.

Some customers only want non-DRM'd books, and some authors and publishing companies are happy to seek their business. If nothing else, it gives them a feature that the larger publishers aren't offering.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

He doesn't want it at the price it's being offered at, or -- very likely -- he wants to sample it first in this hypothetical situation.

Has no one here ever checked out a book from the library before deciding whether or not to buy the book? It's not the same thing, because the library presumably paid the author for the copy (unless it was donated as a used book), but it's ultimately the same concept: I wouldn't read this for $10 but I would read it for free.

There is strong anecdotal evidence linked all over MR that pirates buy a lot. They just don't buy everything they use/sample, and they don't always buy before using it.

I don't pirate, but I understand it. I frequently check books out from the library first before buying.

Well in essence I agree but....
As said the library is a legitimate and time honored source of reading books, not for possessing them forever. Takes patience which some do not possess I admit.

There is a lot of free content out there, you yourself have I believe been pretty liberal in that respect by offering free copies of some of your work. My point here is that that is the authors choice. Not whether theoretically it could get them some new readers but whether they wish to go that route.

The hurting nobody kind of guys are generally IMO not downloading obscure or Indie works. They are downloading popular works that they could get from the library legitimately or God forbid pay for but they just don't want to. Kind of like maybe I don't want to pay the babysitter and I can just not pay it as the babysitter is unlikely to sue. But I must pay my internet as they will cut me off.

I don't care who steals a book personally, just the insane need for justification bothers me. Justify that and what is the next step. A bit extreme but I have actually heard people justify some pretty extreme and violent antisocial behavior on better grounds than that they weren't going to pay for it anyway.

And whether pirates like the one under discussion buy a lot is immaterial to the author being pirated.

Anyway my closing argument is that the person under discussion on my part has posted numerous sanctimonious posts in the past requesting that people not post information helping others in piracy or please do not pirate books. (not that I am any less sanctimonious I am sure)

Helen

[QuantumIguana]

As long as books are read by people with eyes, workable DRM is an impossibility. If someone comes up with extra-nasty DRM, someone will come up with extra-nasty decryption methods. Even without defeating the DRM, someone could type the book in, or make scans of the screen.

[Belle2Be]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

As long as books are read by people with eyes, workable DRM is an impossibility. If someone comes up with extra-nasty DRM, someone will come up with extra-nasty decryption methods. Even without defeating the DRM, someone could type the book in, or make scans of the screen.

Or just take screen shots. People who believe drm protects anything need to actually make an effort to Learn how to remove it. It'll only get easier from here.

[JSWolf]

Let's put it this way, the book is sold exclusively by Amazon. I refuse to buy eBooks from Amazon. So, if I don't download it, I don't read it. If I read it or not, the author & Amazon would be getting the same nothing either way.

I'm not advocating downloading the eBook. I'm just saying that if I was never going to pay for it, no body loses out if I did download it and I just gave a situation where I would never pay for it.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

The hurting nobody kind of guys are generally IMO not downloading obscure or Indie works.

And you're guessing this because...?

One of the reasons people get into torrenting, especially of ebooks, is to find content that's out of print, often with deceased authors and an out-of-business publisher, books of unknown copyright status stuck in legal limbo.

I don't care who steals a book personally, just the insane need for justification bothers me.

Conflating all forms of unauthorized copying as "stealing" bothers me. Why not call it "murder," after all, the pirates are "murdering the author's career?"

Different laws. Different penalties. Accurate labels are not incidental to the issue; one of the essential problems is sorting out exactly what's going on, from a legal standpoint.

And whether pirates like the one under discussion buy a lot is immaterial to the author being pirated.

Whether the pirate buys *that author's* next four books on the basis of getting one for free, is directly relevant. Or would the author prefer to not make any sales as a result of free reads? Or, somehow, they think fans who downloaded a free book are inferior to those who got it from the breakroom at work where people drop off books they don't want to keep.