I am tired of being ripped off.

[JimKal]

Originally Posted by vacooley

OK, so now I have a great new Nook. I go to buy books only to find out that:

a. I can get the REAL book (including shipping) for less.
b. I can get the "Kindle Edition" from Amazon for over $5 less than the "Nook Edition".

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated situation.

I am going to stop buying any Nook ebook that is more than the same Kindle ebook. I will just get a paper copy from Amazon or find a library that has it.

The only way the industry is going to change is if a significant number of potential buyers do the same.

So, who is with me?

You might try contacting B&N. I've done that when I've seen a significant price difference. The response I got wasn't very favorable but I did see the price drop to the Amazon price later. While I tend to be an Amazon shopper, in general, the prices are comparable. I do agree with the other posters that the price of e-books is often higher than it should be but I think that is largely due to the publishers attempting to preserve paperback and hardback sales. I think this will change with time. You also may want to try some of the low cost e-books being offered by both B&N and Amazon. Some of these are only available as e-books. Right now, I think Amazon is doing a better job of e-publishing but B&N has a number of titles as well.

[Rich_D]

Originally Posted by morari

I said exactly what I was trying to say, thank you.

A "book" is an object. It's as simple as that. When you download an eBook, you're not procuring an object, you're downloading data. That data may make up the same CONTENT, but it is certainly not a book.

When you download a collection of songs, do you try to call it a CD?

Actually I say I downloaded an album.

[BVLarson]

I too, am appalled by the prices on some Nook titles. Buy the cheap ones, such as Indies, I'd suggest. If you don't buy any, the accountants will not notice you at all. But if you buy cheap, they will notice and each vote will eventually drive the prices down.
-BVL

[eGeezer]

Naturally, of course, the whole discussion about what constitutes a "Real" book is somewhat silly. Until ebooks take over the world and Dead Tree Books no longer exist in any form whatsoever, then I have no trouble differentiating "Real" books from ebooks.

I am perfectly willing to accept that "Real" books are those that can be held, smelled, and the pages can be physically turned, written on, and have their corners folded as bookmarks. Electronic representations of those actions are nice, but "Real" books have been around since they were called manuscripts and scrolls and deserve to be differentiated as "real" as long as they exist in that physical form.

An ebook may have the same content, but it is still just a file on a disk or memory card until it is printed out and bound into a "book".

That said, we use such terms as pbook and dtbook to differentiate between the physical formats and electronic formats (ebook). We don't just say "book" because then no one knows to which we refer. However, a format that has been around for maybe 10 years is not what comes to mind when one chooses to say "real". Paper books have been around for thousands, not tens, of years, and have earned the right to be referred to as "Real" if someone chooses to do so.

Yeah, both formats are books, but Paper books are still the only "Real" books. Even as one of those who doesn't expect ever to buy another "real" book, they deserve our respect for the job they have done, and what they have endured for thousands of year.

Hoo ray for Paper books, they are my "real" hero.

rofl.

Oh. Did I say the whole discussion is silly? Hope I helped make it so.

[Tattncat]

Originally Posted by Rich_D

I've read on the B&N forum that if you notify them of the difference, B&N will often lower their price. I've not tried it though

Actually, I did notify them of a price difference. Not only dud they lower the price, but they gave me a credit.

[DuncanWatson]

I think we have it wrong.

Paper books are Natural books and Electronic books are Transcendental. Though I would accept that they are Rational instead, though if we assume that electronic books are rational, irrational, and transcendental then we may as well call them Real.

[Avarwen]

Just use inkmesh it will show you where to buy cheaper books. One of the reasons I choose the Nook over the Kindle is that I can shop at more than one ebook store with the Nook as apposed to being stuck with whatever price Amazon chooses. Amazon is not always the cheapest and if it is I can just use my ipod touch to read if it's that much cheaper usually it's not.

[edembowski]

Originally Posted by Doug Pardee

To be pedantic—one of my favorite activities—there's no "borderline" legality about it in the US. In the US, circumventing DRM from e-books is illegal, even for personal use. ...

Not only is this not true, there is no case law to support your position. There has never been a single case brought before US courts against an individual for removing content from otherwise legally purchased material (e-books or otherwise). The Sklyarov case was about the creation of circumvention tools, and he won the case. Constitutional and jurisdictional issues aside, this is because the DMCA has specific clauses allowing the reverse engineering of electronic controls for the sake of interoperability. It is perfectly legal to remove DRM on your content, although many content providers would have you believe otherwise.

- Ed

[LoganK]

Originally Posted by edembowski

Not only is this not true, there is no case law to support your position.

I'd like to back up this statement, although I don't remember all the specifics (it's been a while). I think the simple version of the current situation is: legal to strip DRM from content to you own, illegal to distribute the tools to allow you to do this.

The Skylarov case is interesting, however, in that a jury found that merely distributing the tools was not considered a "willful" infringement (meaning that the Russian employees did not intend to violate U. S. law). Whether or not this finding would help a U. S. citizen, I am not entirely sure (especially when a jury is involved). However, the next ebook mega-strip package (that removes DRM from all five (at least!) major formats) will likely include watermarks in the resultant book, hopefully clarifying that the community developing those tools have no intention of distributing the result.

[edembowski]

It's been a while, but from what I remember Slyarov was arrested after giving his presentation. The charges were around the fact that he was disclosing how Adobe's DRM worked at the time (Slyarov) as well as for distributing circumvention tools (ElcomSoft). Adobe quickly dropped charges, but the case was prosecuted anyway. Although it was developed in Russia, the presentation was given here, and the software was made available for sale here.

Which package do you mean? I have no problem with content being watermarked. Apple does it for all of their audio, and that's no longer encrypted. It makes sense, and it's in line with the risks involved.

[LoganK]

Originally Posted by edembowski

It's been a while, but from what I remember Slyarov was arrested after giving his presentation. The charges were around the fact that he was disclosing how Adobe's DRM worked at the time (Slyarov) as well as for distributing circumvention tools (ElcomSoft). Adobe quickly dropped charges, but the case was prosecuted anyway. Although it was developed in Russia, the presentation was given here, and the software was made available for sale here.

Your memory is correct. I am merely suggesting that the argument isn't over yet, and part of what may have swayed the jury was the fact that what they were doing was legal in their own country and their product was simply sold without geographic restrictions.

Originally Posted by edembowski

Which package do you mean? I have no problem with content being watermarked. Apple does it for all of their audio, and that's no longer encrypted. It makes sense, and it's in line with the risks involved.

The one generally associated with The Dark Reverser (and Apprentice Alf). I think it's great that the community is taking that step and clearly stating these tools are for personal use, not for distribution.

[delaplane]

I just set a $10 upper price limit for myself and won't pay more than that for an ebook. Sure, I've had to pass on quite a few books but there's so much out there that I want to read that's below that price that I won't ever run out of reading material. Usually, the initial price will come down in a few months or a year so I will end up with the book at some point later.

[eGeezer]

Originally Posted by delaplane

...Usually, the initial price will come down in a few months or a year so I will end up with the book at some point later.

That seems to work for everything else. I'm not so sure with the morons trying to run the ebook world. Got my fingers crossed, too, tho.

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by delaplane

Usually, the initial price will come down in a few months or a year...

I'm not aware of any evidence of that in the ebook world. I remember some months ago when the head of Macmillan said that such a thing would occur, but I don't think that it has happened yet.

Care to give us any examples?

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by edembowski

Not only is this not true, there is no case law to support your position.

There doesn't need to be case law. It's illegal. Case law certainly could change that, but because there hasn't been any case law, it's still illegal.

I don't expect to see any case law on DMCA circumvention of legally obtained material for personal use. There doesn't seem to be any interest in suing paying customers over such things. But that doesn't make it legal. I did say that I was being pedantic.

the DMCA has specific clauses allowing the reverse engineering of electronic controls for the sake of interoperability. It is perfectly legal to remove DRM on your content

This is patently false. Please refer to the DMCA, 17 USC 1201. The statutory exceptions are in subsections (d) through (j):

• (d) Exemption for Nonprofit Libraries, Archives, and Educational Institutions
• (e) Law Enforcement, Intelligence, and Other Government Activities
• (f) Reverse Engineering
• (g) Encryption Research
• (h) Exceptions Regarding Minors
• (i) Protection of Personally Identifying Information
• (j) Security Testing

Subsection (f) is the only mention of "interoperability", and it's only applicable to computer programs, not to e-books. Subsection (f)(4) notes, "the term “interoperability” means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged."

Additional exceptions established by the Librarian of Congress under subsection (a)(1)(c) provide for "jailbreaking" of "computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications" for interoperability (exception #2), but not for any other case.

Stripping DRM from e-books that you've legally obtained, for the purpose of reading those e-books, currently is illegal in the US (except as provided by the Librarian of Congress's exception #6) whether anyone ever gets sued for it or not.