Christian Science Monitor labels Kindle a ‘Trojan horse’

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by trehberg

In my opinion, DRM is simply the evolution of copyright.

Sort of. Most DRM implementations go way beyond what copyright intended. The main use of DRM doesn't really have anything to do with protecting the author's/publisher's rights, but more to do with restricting/controlling access. It's actually an attempt to remove what have previously been consumer's rights. I guess you could think of that as an "evolution", but it's more like a "perversion" of copyright.

[GlennD]

I may have watched too much Star Trek (they just whip out their PADD and access any written or musical work at the drop of a hat), but I can see a future where consumers simply purchase access to 'content' in general, whether by subscription or some kind of micropayment. Artists would receive compensation whenever someone accessed their work. So rather than worry about where your files are stored, you know you always have access to all of the available content.

I think the hard part of the argument is that both sides are right. Consumers want unfettered access to the content they have purchased, independent of device or file format. Artists, writers and performers want (and deserve) compensation for the creative work they've done. I don't see that either side is wrong.

My own opinion is that compromises will be made to extend the life of the current business model, but in the end reality and technology are going to require a complete change to the model. A structure like I describe above flattens things out - piracy becomes irrelevant (it's no longer financially worth it), but you also probably don't have the extremely wealthy authors and artists either.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by trehberg

In my opinion, DRM is simply the evolution of copyright....

Uhm, perhaps..., if you mean it, kind of like, that communism and national socialism are the evolution of democracy.

Other than that, I do believe that a flat-fee subscription model is a viable option. I repeat, "option." Think library. But many will still desire to have a collection, to keep on whatever hardware they desire.

[nibbler]

The problem I have with this article is that she takes states that "You can download only from Amazon’s store, making it difficult to read anything that is not routed through Amazon first". This is certainly not true. It's rather easy to get non-amazon content onto the device. I've posted a length post on the topic here. Additionally I've written up a post for an alternative distribution method for non-DRM books for the kindle.. Don't get me wrong. DRM is a horrible thing, but the model will change in time, just as it has for music

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Yes it does and yes you do. Go look at section 1201 of the DMCA.

From the DMCA exemptions...

4. Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book's read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.

It says nothing about having to be disabled.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2006/11...ptions-granted

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by nibbler

The problem I have with this article is that she takes states that "You can download only from Amazon’s store, making it difficult to read anything that is not routed through Amazon first". This is certainly not true. It's rather easy to get non-amazon content onto the device. I've posted a length post on the topic here. Additionally I've written up a post for an alternative distribution method for non-DRM books for the kindle.. Don't get me wrong. DRM is a horrible thing, but the model will change in time, just as it has for music

But most people will be purchasing a Kindle to be able to read current eBooks. These are mostly eBooks that would be DRMed. So for most people, Amazon is the only place.

[Patricia]

Originally Posted by thibaulthalpern

I agree what Professor Walshe wrote in that article. I think the way it should be is digital editions without DRM. Academic journal articles are already this way. A university (or yourself) can subscribe to an electronic version of a journal and the publisher provides PDF versions of the full articles of the journal. These PDF versions are not DRM'd--at least not the ones I encounter which are in the humanities and social sciences. These PDF versions are downloadable and freely transferrable to your other computers and devices.

The way the rest of the digital book industry is going, I'm not pleased at all. If anyone wants to see a total replacement of paper (referring to discussion on another thread in this sub-forum) then we'll have to solve this problem of access which DRM prevents. Until then, it won't go anywhere far.

It's not that simple, unfortunately. In the days of paper, when your university decided to stop a subscription to Mind, or French History, then you still had the back issues of the journal on your library shelves.
Now, when your university cancels a subscription to a journal in electronic format, it entirely vanishes mmediately. You will no longer be able to look at the back numbers.
I know of several university departments near me, who would like to trim their library budget, owing to the financial situation.

A further problem arises when the publishers sell electronic journal subscriptions in bundles. You might no longer want the Journal of Obscure Studies, or Metatextual Musings, but you can't get rid of them without losing the one journal that you do actually want.

Believe me, librarians and academics on the library commitee are tearing out their hair about this. We are saving a lot of valuable shelf-space; scholars can access journals from their homes; but the cost of renting these journals is more than you think. And while the publishers may call it an electronic subscription, it's really just an expensive rental.

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

"Yet" is the operative word. DRM is fundamentally flawed. There is no such thing as DRM which can't be removed, it's just a question of whether or not anyone has figured it out yet. Given enough knowledge and time, any DRM system can be removed.

Sure, but the restrictions are there and many people like me do not know how to hack through and even competent users like me find it a hassle to learn how to take the DRM off of Mobi formats and PDF formats. It's a hassle because I have to spend at least several hours to understand the instructions posted and I have put that aside until I have several hours to spare.

Would YOU like to do it for me? ;-)

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by GlennD

I may have watched too much Star Trek (they just whip out their PADD and access any written or musical work at the drop of a hat), but I can see a future where consumers simply purchase access to 'content' in general, whether by subscription or some kind of micropayment. Artists would receive compensation whenever someone accessed their work. So rather than worry about where your files are stored, you know you always have access to all of the available content.

I don't see that future. Technology is not removed from the human world. They are of the human world. And given that, we have fundamental questions regarding ownership, property, access, rights, freedom and so forth that go WAY beyond the realm of technology but technology is part of. These issues I've listed have been part of various societies for a long time.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

From the DMCA exemptions...



It says nothing about having to be disabled.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2006/11...ptions-granted

That's why I said go read the DMCA.

DMCA section 1201(D):

(D) The Librarian shall publish any class of copyrighted works for which the Librarian has determined, pursuant to the rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), that noninfringing uses by persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to such users with respect to such class of works for the ensuing 3-year period.

Unless you are adversely affected, the exception does not apply to you.

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by Patricia

It's not that simple, unfortunately. In the days of paper, when your university decided to stop a subscription to Mind, or French History, then you still had the back issues of the journal on your library shelves.
Now, when your university cancels a subscription to a journal in electronic format, it entirely vanishes mmediately. You will no longer be able to look at the back numbers.
I know of several university departments near me, who would like to trim their library budget, owing to the financial situation.

A further problem arises when the publishers sell electronic journal subscriptions in bundles. You might no longer want the Journal of Obscure Studies, or Metatextual Musings, but you can't get rid of them without losing the one journal that you do actually want.

Believe me, librarians and academics on the library commitee are tearing out their hair about this. We are saving a lot of valuable shelf-space; scholars can access journals from their homes; but the cost of renting these journals is more than you think. And while the publishers may call it an electronic subscription, it's really just an expensive rental.

Sure, I can understand that but that isn't a DRM technology issue which is what I'm talking about. With ebooks, the DRM are prohibitive and attached to the ebook. The academic journals don't have PDFs with DRM. You are right about the point that once the university stops "subscribing" to those electronic formats, the entire access goes away.

[nibbler]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But most people will be purchasing a Kindle to be able to read current eBooks. These are mostly eBooks that would be DRMed. So for most people, Amazon is the only place.

Forum ate my post... I'll try it again.

Yes, I get that and if the tone of her article was "DRM is horrible, we need to do open things up" I'd be standing up applauding her.

The article which starts with a fallacy winds through the first amendment, makes a stop off with twitter and facebook and end, with the end of the American Way of Life because people stop reading feels more like FUD then an article written by a Professor of anything. No one is going to stop reading because of the Kindle, just like no one stopped listening to music because of the iPod. And I'm really put off by her "for the love of all that's Holy, get to a library before it's to late! Civilization may be at stake!", attitude. If I were more cynical, I'd say she was a buggy whip manufacturer in the days of the horseless carriage or, worse yet, a music executive.

I agree DRM is bad, it's not the device. This is why I'm looking at alternate distribution models. If the DRM is the problem, don't blame the device, make sure you put DRM-free content on it.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It says nothing about having to be disabled.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2006/11...ptions-granted

First, you have to be "adversely affected" for those exceptions to apply. How is a sighted person "adversely affected" because the book can not be read out loud of by a screen reader?

Oh, an "adversely affected" doesn't mean that the LIT book was $2 cheaper than the ebook in the Sony store.

Secondly, are you telling me that ALL electronic formats of every book disables read allowed or screen reader software?

BOb

[jgray]

Originally Posted by GlennD

I may have watched too much Star Trek (they just whip out their PADD and access any written or musical work at the drop of a hat),

Yes, but in the Star Trek universe people don't work for money any more (at least in the Federation). This would imply that all of those creative works are available for free.

I always wondered how they manage to do without some form of currency. If you go to the neighborhood bar in the 24th century, are the drinks free? And if you drink at Quark's bar, they certainly are not free.

[Neil]

DRM on ebooks threatens not just the idea of personal ownership but indeed breaks the very idea of what a "book" has always meant ever since incunabula publishers moved to, well, movable type. Because of its production technique a book has always been cheap enough to be afforded and has always been able to be shared between friends. It has always had both an intrinsic value as well as an artistic value, and adds to it a resale value. The DRM'd books on Amazon and elsewhere steal ownership from readers just as sincerely as publishers fear readers will steal content. Because publishers are now in control the poor consumer must dance to their lock-step tune. But as the internet and other forms of information access become ever more powerful publishers may well find that they cannot control access in this manner and risk making consumers so angry they will become thieves out of spite as well as out of need. For we need only look at how technology has changed the face of email -- from amber letters on a black CRT run by slash-commands and intricate keystrokes to black on paper-white run by a few mouseclicks that most grandparents can learn. So right now to remove DRM means the one must learn at least the rudiments of a language like Python and be enough of a techie to brave Terminal mode. But in a year or less I would suspect that widely available will be GUI-intensive solutions that will remove DRM like a snake sheds its skin. Point-click-freedom. So if I was a publisher I would ask what model I should follow given this? The Baen Library model of freely publishing ebooks to supplement print? Or the Amazon model of greedily holding everything close? Which type of model will tommorrow's consumer show appreciation for having been on the receiving end? I know how I'll act should someone come up with a reader equivalent to my otherwise beloved Kindle that has a store without DRM that offers many choices. Or how I'll cleave back to Amazon if they wake up with the Kindle 3. Meanwhile I would never have bought a Kindle and put up with the DRM but, heck, even this grandpa still had enough brain cells to learn Python. Technology has to stop lagging trust.