DRM is necessary and good, stop complaining

[micomicon]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

There are probably millions of out-of-copyright works that are only currently only available within libraries, and are unlikely to be digitised anytime soon. Without libraries these would be lost.

Agreed, it's not gonna happen overnight. But it will happen. BTW, digitized works have better prospects of longevity than those printed on fragile organic matter.

Where are the digital solutions giving blind readers access to huge amounts of material?

This is actually one of the advantages digital has over wood pulp.

How will the less tech savvy readers get hold of obscure books at reasonable prices without a library service?

Q: How did the illiterate get access to pbook libraries?
A: They learned to read.

I think there's a bigger leap to go from illiterate to literate than it is to go from "less tech savvy" to "able to use an elibrary".

What about the poor who can't afford to buy all the books they want to read?

Again, this is an area where ebooks have an advantage over pbooks. Digital copies are much cheaper to produce and distribute.

Who'll bother digitising local history archives that are of interest to a very small clientele?

Have you heard of the "long tail"? If the prospective audience of a library's collection is expanded to include "everyone", it has a much higher chance of finding an interested audience for its works.

reading for recreation can still be enhanced by the tactile and visual appeal of a beautifully produced book.

Please, do we really need to discuss this? I'm sure there were people who loved the tactile experience of clay tablets with cuneiform writing; the heft, the texture, the nice color. This does not mean they were a more effective vessel of knowledge. (That's what we're discussing here, right?)

Libraries are too precious to surrender willingly; and we should remember that Western civilisation only survives to the present day because of the heroic librarians of the past. They may yet be called upon again, we cannot afford to be without them.

One of the things that differentiates Western civilization is our willingness to let go of the past when a newer, better way of doing things comes along. Librarians are heroic, and I think they have a large role to play in the future. However, I do not think the day-to-day job is going to look much like it did in the past.

Is there something sacred about libraries? Yes! Imho, they are more sacred than cathedrals.

Public libraries, as we know them today, are not that old. As with all human institutions, the library has undergone a great deal of change throughout its history.

Are repositories of human knowledge sacred? Yes. Are huge buildings containing stacks upon stacks of information printed on wood pulp sacred? No.

[6charlong]

This thread got me curious about where the candidates for the US Presidency stand. This is the only one I found that addresses the issue on their Web site:

Protect American Intellectual Property Abroad: The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that in 2005, more than nine of every 10 DVDs sold in China were illegal copies. The U.S. Trade Representative said 80 percent of all counterfeit products seized at U.S. borders still come from China. Barack Obama will work to ensure intellectual property is protected in foreign markets, and promote greater cooperation on international standards that allow our technologies to compete everywhere.

Protect Intellectual Property at Home: Intellectual property is to the digital age what physical goods were to the industrial age. Barack Obama believes we need to update and reform our copyright and patent systems to promote civic discourse, innovation and investment while ensuring that intellectual property owners are fairly treated.

Reform the Patent System: A system that produces timely, high-quality patents is essential for global competitiveness in the 21st century. By improving predictability and clarity in our patent system, we will help foster an environment that encourages innovation. Giving the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the resources to improve patent quality and opening up the patent process to citizen review will reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation. With better informational resources, the Patent and Trademark Office could offer patent applicants who know they have significant inventions the option of a rigorous and public peer review that would produce a "gold-plated" patent much less vulnerable to court challenge. Where dubious patents are being asserted, the PTO could conduct low-cost, timely administrative proceedings to determine patent validity. As president, Barack Obama will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and collaboration.

[drgnbear]

Imagine what was lost to the world when the great library of Alexandria burned to the ground. If only it all could have been digitized and stored on a remote server... I wonder if I could hold the entire library on my Kindle? LOL

[Penforhire]

I think the original poster has a valid point as viewed from the other end of the equation. He is rightfully concerned about how authors are paid for their work in a non-DRM digital world. I personally dislike DRM. I have modern programs with dongles because of it. But I understand it. What are the alternatives?

Baen exists in a small niche. I am not convinced their model would survive Joe Public exposure once e-readers are common.

DRM would be less onerous if the format never changed; If the books we buy today would absolutely "work" in ten years. But digital has proven to be much more fragile than that. Whether it is a DRM-server going down (or out of business) or a CD/hard drive failure, DRM is a disaster waiting to happen. Let's say it has too much potential for failure.

Paper books have the potential to burn or fade but they has a much longer track record of success than e-books. As a reasonable man I feel justified in stripping DRM out or avoiding it whenever possible in my possessions.

I suggested in other threads that the subscription model appears to be the golden path to me. You don't need DRM if any book I want can be delivered on demand. You don't need to own the books at all if truly on-demand. If you are an annotation freak we could have "sidecar" files so any time that book is loaded into your reader your notes get loaded too. As much as I like books, and my house overflows with books, I am having a hard time justifying my own resistance to the subscription model.

You could argue that in a real purchase I do not have any on-going cost. But if on-going expense is a burden them perhaps our governments can subsidize it for the poor, like anything else.

I think the strongest objection I have now is, who gets to maintain all the content and rake in the money? Clearly whoever that is would have to kick back funds to publishers and they, in turn, to writers. Amazon's Kindle looks like "version 1" of precisely the device (and company) that could support that business model.

Am I missing anything? (sorry for rambling)

[micomicon]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

I think the original poster has a valid point as viewed from the other end of the equation. He is rightfully concerned about how authors are paid for their work in a non-DRM digital world... What are the alternatives?

For authors there are many alternatives. With ebooks, self-publishing is a real possibility, and business models are legion. I believe there is at least one self-publishing author in these fora.

For the publishing industry -- who DRM really serves -- the options are very limited. Publishers are in the uncomfortable position of horse-carriage manufacturers facing the internal combustion engine. They are trying to impose speed limits on us to keep the roads safe for their products.

[JohnClif]

I've read this thread, being an author and an ereader user/owner for many years now.

Those who are against DRM have yet to answer how they would ensure that authors/publishers get compensated fairly without it. And, 'fairly' means they get paid according to their terms, not yours. The customer's choice is to buy or not buy, not rip off the author/publisher because they disagree with the price.

Those who are for DRM have yet to answer how they would ensure that customers have their rights protected. Once a customer buys a book, they should own the right to read that book in perpetuity. They should have the right to sell that book to another, and to receive whatever price that can be mutually agree upon to transfer the right to read that ebook.

If Amazon would do either of two things, a lot of people who are upset about DRM would be a lot less upset:

• Provide translation to and from DRM Mobipocket to .AZW for a nominal fee (ten cents?)
• Support DRM Mobipocket

Additionally, if Amazon would provide a service that allowed people to post their used Kindle books (actually the rights to read a book) back on Amazon's Kindle Shop for other Kindle buyers to purchase (and charge a nominal fee, ten cents?) for this, then Kindle adoption would be wide-spread and enthusiastic.

Doing these things is really trivial for Amazon... and would result in lots more profits. Why they don't is beyond me.

And finally... I think DRM will be transformed by eBook manufacturers more than publishers, although publishers will also be pushing for it. Really, the more formats/devices that a book can be read in/on, the better for everyone (publishers, readers, even Amazon). So, I expect to see DRM between .AZW and .MOBI brought in alignment along with a conversion service and ereader software upgrades... to end the Tower of Babel once and for all.

[micomicon]

John, I sympathize with your position. However, you argue from the perspective of maintaining the status quo. This is untenable in the long term.

Originally Posted by JohnClif

'fairly' means they get paid according to their terms, not yours.

Sorry to be blunt, but this definition of fairness is becoming obsolete. This is exactly what is so painful about this transition: it shifts power to consumers in previously unimaginable ways.

The customer's choice is to buy or not buy

The flipside: the author's choice is to publish or not to publish. It will be a long time before anyone is forced to make this choice vis-a-vis DRM, but I think it will eventually happen. I also believe the current players in the industry (authors, editors, publishers, etc.) will have to choose between adapting to the new conditions or facing irrelevance.

BTW, I'm not saying that any of this is either good or bad, nor do I purport to have answers to your questions. I'm just pointing out the facts...

1. We are dealing with a new medium.
2. The new medium upends many of the pricing/control/ownership structures that support its predecessor.
3. The parties that have a vested interest in the old medium are throttling the new medium in order to preserve their interests.
4. The historical record is not on the side of parties that have attempted this sort of throttling in other industries.

For the record, I've always payed for my books, music, films, etc., and plan to keep doing so even if I were able to download them for free. It is the honorable thing to do, and as a creator myself I know the hard work that is required to produce cultural artifacts. Do I think everyone will act honorably? No. Do I think most people will? Given a choice, yes.

[PHugger]

Originally Posted by JohnClif

Those who are against DRM have yet to answer how they would ensure that authors/publishers get compensated fairly without it. And, 'fairly' means they get paid according to their terms, not yours. The customer's choice is to buy or not buy, not rip off the author/publisher because they disagree with the price.

Thanks for responding John. It's great to hear from an author.

First - I have no quibbles about price. If I feel something is too expensive, I won't buy it. A purchase is a contract where both parties must be satisfied. Charge whatever you want - the market will determine whether you are right or wrong.

Second - I'm not sure it's fair to burden a purchaser with the responsibility of ensuring that authors and publishers are treated fairly. As I've said before, once I legally purchase your content, I have fulfilled all of my copyright, moral, and financial responsibilities. The transaction is completed. DRM is a pain in the hinder - an inconvenience for me the legal purchaser of your content. DRM attempts to halt piracy, but mostly just effects your customers - NOT the pirates. I'd like my eBooks to work the same way that pBooks do. They are locked onto a single reader and a single PC. That would be like buying a pBook and being forced to read it only when seated in one specific chair. I don't have the answers - I just know that burdening customers with feeble DRM is not the answer. Stop the pirates without inconveniencing the customers. It's a hard problem, but smart people can figure it out.


Best regards,
PCH

[JohnClif]

Originally Posted by PHugger

Second - I'm not sure it's fair to burden a purchaser with the responsibility of ensuring that authors and publishers are treated fairly. As I've said before, once I legally purchase your content, I have fulfilled all of my copyright, moral, and financial responsibilities. The transaction is completed. DRM is a pain in the hinder - an inconvenience for me the legal purchaser of your content. DRM attempts to halt piracy, but mostly just effects your customers - NOT the pirates. I'd like my eBooks to work the same way that pBooks do.

I don't think it's unreasonable or immoral to expect the purchaser to respect the purchase agreement, i.e., don't distribute copies of the ebook to people who haven't paid for it. If authors/publishers can't be assured of receiving money for each individual user of an ebook, they will be dissuaded from publishing ebooks, and the movement away from paper stops in its tracks. So, DRM attempts to protect the author/publisher without angering the customer too much.

I agree that DRM is a PITA, primarily because we have two states: the ebook is freely distributable, or it is completely non-distributable including to the original purchaser.

Maybe a model where the price you pay for an ebook sets that ebook's lifetime, i.e., a low price gives you the book for days, higher for weeks or months, highest for lifetime. But I'm also sure the publishing industry knows what the 'lifetime' of a typical novel is (one, maybe two read-throughs). Reference books are different.

Yep... rights protection (by whatever means) still has to be figured out in order to move books away from paper. It's gotta work for everyone.

[JohnClif]

Originally Posted by micomicon

Sorry to be blunt, but this definition of fairness is becoming obsolete. This is exactly what is so painful about this transition: it shifts power to consumers in previously unimaginable ways.

Fairness can never become obsolete. What's fair is fair, regardless. It's not about power, it's about rights. If you can strip DRM and resell multiple copies of my work that are now unprotected, you have the power, but you do not have the right. The ebook model will not work unless authors/publishers can rest assured that they will not be ripped off.

The flipside: the author's choice is to publish or not to publish. It will be a long time before anyone is forced to make this choice vis-a-vis DRM, but I think it will eventually happen. I also believe the current players in the industry (authors, editors, publishers, etc.) will have to choose between adapting to the new conditions or facing irrelevance.

Yes, that is the choice. If there is no financial incentive to publish ebooks, if ebooks aren't at least as protected from piracy as pbooks, then the ebook world will die, at least for copyright-protected books. That hurts both consumer and producer.

BTW, I'm not saying that any of this is either good or bad, nor do I purport to have answers to your questions. I'm just pointing out the facts...

1. We are dealing with a new medium.
2. The new medium upends many of the pricing/control/ownership structures that support its predecessor.
3. The parties that have a vested interest in the old medium are throttling the new medium in order to preserve their interests.
4. The historical record is not on the side of parties that have attempted this sort of throttling in other industries.

It's not about throttling the new medium, it's about ensuring that authors get paid at least as much under the new system as they did the old system. What the new medium does is remove the barriers to entry for smaller or less-well-known authors and publishers. What it also may do is remove the incentive for those people. What makes capitalism work over pure socialism/communism is the ability for people to be compensated in proportion to the quality and quantity of work they produce as judged by the market. If that won't hold true for ebooks then no one will write ebooks.

For the record, I've always payed for my books, music, films, etc., and plan to keep doing so even if I were able to download them for free. It is the honorable thing to do, and as a creator myself I know the hard work that is required to produce cultural artifacts. Do I think everyone will act honorably? No. Do I think most people will? Given a choice, yes.

Many people are indeed honest. But, not everyone. When Microsoft put the ability to have their software (Windows, Office, etc.) actually talk to Microsoft Internet servers when running on a connected computer, they discovered that two-thirds of the Microsoft software that was running was pirated. Can you imagine that? Microsoft was losing tens of billions of dollars a year due to piracy. It's easy to understand why they implemented a very robust DRM strategy for their products.

[kovidgoyal]

When Microsoft put the ability to have their software (Windows, Office, etc.) actually talk to Microsoft Internet servers when running on a connected computer, they discovered that two-thirds of the Microsoft software that was running was pirated. Can you imagine that? Microsoft was losing tens of billions of dollars a year due to piracy. It's easy to understand why they implemented a very robust DRM strategy for their products.

And yet Microsoft is a billion dollar company. Cue sermon about greed. Cue sermon about monopolistic trade practices. Cue sermon about their DRM already having been cracked. Cue sermon about their impending downfall to Linux.

[maxk]

Originally Posted by JohnClif

Many people are indeed honest. But, not everyone. When Microsoft put the ability to have their software (Windows, Office, etc.) actually talk to Microsoft Internet servers when running on a connected computer, they discovered that two-thirds of the Microsoft software that was running was pirated. Can you imagine that? Microsoft was losing tens of billions of dollars a year due to piracy. It's easy to understand why they implemented a very robust DRM strategy for their products.

Not sure where you get the idea they have a robust DRM strategy.

Try a bit torrent search for any of their products.

As people keep repeating, an inconvenience for honest paying users, still poses no problems for thieves.

[hidari]

Perhaps the Ebook will do what Emusic has done to the Music Industry. I, for one, was tired of paying for overpriced CDs and watching Record companies put holes in my wallet.

Now and If, The ebook rises to a fair amount of fame; we will see book prices at a normal level.


NB: I can let my friend borrow a p-book and I do not hear any screams form authors or the publishing industry, yet an Ebook causes riots. Perhaps the afore mentioned are afraid of ending up in the dustbin with the rest of us.

As for Microsoft...Give me a break. They find out that they have pirated editions of their software. I do not Think Mr. Gates is crying over whether his firm has 50 billion vs 15 billion in his pockets. That is a weak point.

I have lived in Russia for years. You can buy most software for 5 dollars on the street once it hits the markets in the USA and Europe within 48 hours. Most people buy it and many companies use black market software. Now, Microsoft and many companies are starting to Release Russian versions of their software and "Normal" Prices ...and Surprise....People are buying it.

I just hope the Same comes of Ebooks. Way overpriced and the selection is poor on many sites. Not everyone reads best sellers.......

Originally Posted by JohnClif

Fairness can never become obsolete. What's fair is fair, regardless. It's not about power, it's about rights. If you can strip DRM and resell multiple copies of my work that are now unprotected, you have the power, but you do not have the right. The ebook model will not work unless authors/publishers can rest assured that they will not be ripped off.



Yes, that is the choice. If there is no financial incentive to publish ebooks, if ebooks aren't at least as protected from piracy as pbooks, then the ebook world will die, at least for copyright-protected books. That hurts both consumer and producer.



It's not about throttling the new medium, it's about ensuring that authors get paid at least as much under the new system as they did the old system. What the new medium does is remove the barriers to entry for smaller or less-well-known authors and publishers. What it also may do is remove the incentive for those people. What makes capitalism work over pure socialism/communism is the ability for people to be compensated in proportion to the quality and quantity of work they produce as judged by the market. If that won't hold true for ebooks then no one will write ebooks.



Many people are indeed honest. But, not everyone. When Microsoft put the ability to have their software (Windows, Office, etc.) actually talk to Microsoft Internet servers when running on a connected computer, they discovered that two-thirds of the Microsoft software that was running was pirated. Can you imagine that? Microsoft was losing tens of billions of dollars a year due to piracy. It's easy to understand why they implemented a very robust DRM strategy for their products.

[delphidb96]

JonClif,

Screw the $0.10 per translation between Secure Mobipocket and AZW! What Amazon *SHOULD* do is create an application for the PC/Mac which does the translation. And then they should either *GIVE* it away, or charge a small (less than $40), one-time fee for it.

Let's take my case in point. I've got well over 2,000 Secure Mobipocket ebooks. (Okay, I've got over 4,900 DRM'd eReader ebooks as well, but let's take things one step at a time.) Why should I - if I decide to abandon the Cybook Gen3 - *PAY* over $200 to convert these already-purchased Secure Mobipocket ebooks?!? And until someone can give me such an application, I'm not buying a Kindle. Nosirree-Bob! Not gonna go there!

Derek

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Let's take my case in point. I've got well over 2,000 Secure Mobipocket ebooks.

Good Heavens!

(Okay, I've got over 4,900 DRM'd eReader ebooks as well, but let's take things one step at a time.) Why should I - if I decide to abandon the Cybook Gen3 - *PAY* over $200 to convert these already-purchased Secure Mobipocket ebooks?!? And until someone can give me such an application, I'm not buying a Kindle. Nosirree-Bob! Not gonna go there!

Derek

Don't you think that's one of the benefits of DRM from the supplier's viewpoint - that fact that it effectively locks you in to that provider? To use an analogy I've used before, it's very similar to the way that SLR camera manufacturers all use different lens mounts. If you've already spent a fortune on Nikon lenses, when you buy a new camera you're probably not going to throw away that investment and buy a Canon camera - you're going to buy another Nikon camera body so you can continue to use your existing lenses. Similarly, you (like me) are going to continue buying reading devices which support MobiPocket you that you don't lose your investment in your eBooks.

We may not like it as consumers, but from the supplier's viewpoint it makes excellent business sense.