People who want no DRM are impractical dreamers...

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

What you kind of seem to be saying is that authors and publishers shouldn't even try to use the limited tools available to secure their rights, if there is a chance that their efforts might inconvenience some consumer somewhere. Needless to say, that's not the standard with any physical product .

I'm saying that publishers shouldn't use DRM because it costs them money and doesn't improve sales.

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by stonetools

DRM is simply another minor inconvenience, in the big scheme of things.

If I am in constant danger of, losing stuff (because the creating company, or their DRM provider goes belly up, or said stuff is no longer supported by new rightholders) I actually PAID for it is certainly NOT a minor inconvenience but it IS truth about how DRM WORKS.

And don't even try to tell me, I'm sketching horror scenarios, since I only need to raise my head to see a lot of various digital data carriers which would be pretty useless NOW if there 'd be DRM on them.

[JSWolf]

Mom has a pBook she's just finished reading. I've never read anything by that author and borrow the book from her. I read it and I like it and then I decide I want to buy more books from this author to read. Sales happen.

Mom has a DRMed eBook and the DRM is tied to her account and not mine. I don't get to read it, I don't then buy more eBooks from this author. Sales do not happen. The author and publisher lose sales because of the DRM.

So in these cases, no DRM is a good thing and DRM is a bad thing. stonetools, go ahead and prove me wrong.

[stonetools]

My favorite response to big-publishing folks who start to tell me that "Baen is different, because..." is to ask them "So what does that tell you about what YOU are doing wrong? Baen has been succeeding in eBooks for a decade; you haven't. So if 'Baen is different...', hadn't you better consider that the difference relates to something they've been doing that you need to learn about?"

Look , the success of Baen is a wonderful thing, but so long as its the ONLY significant success, well, its a hard thing to bet a whole industry, that supports millions of authors and related personnel , on a model that hasn't enjoyed widespread success. Mobileread forum supporters don't have that responsibility, so its easy for them to blithely say, "Leap by faith into the dark. The landing won't be so bad!".
And this over something-DRM- that is more of an annoyance than anything else and can changed to allay the most serious concerns of the digerati.

[Leiaz]

Originally Posted by stonetools

It's one thing if its available on Darknet, where only the congnoscenti can get at it.

I completely disagree that only competent users will know how to use torrents and peer to peer networks.

There are those who use that "Darknet" and don't care about DRM because they would never buy an ebook in the first place. You see, they bought this shiny new machine and a computer and *pay* for internet access so obviously they are allowed to download books (films/music) for free from that torrent website their friend Joe user showed them. You don't need to be a computer scientist to use a torrent site. People who can't even install a printer without help can do it. They just need someone around them to tell them "hey, use that software to get things for free!!!". They don't need to understand how it works, and don't need to know the meaning of DRM.


Others don't care about DRM because they can remove them as soon as the file hits their hard drive. Maybe they just know it as the thing preventing them to use Amazon books on their device, and luckily they found software on the internet to fix that problem. This software didn't appear out of thin air, someone with more technical knowledge wrote it.

If the "average user" can't fix the problem, he will come to a more competent user and ask to "just make it work". Of course, he may never know or care about DRM, because he won't listen to any explanations, he relies on someone else to do it for him.

That is why it is irrelevant that those users don't care about DRM. More knowledgeable people are going to fix their computer problems. It is logical that only those competent users are going to go on forums to speak against DRM.



You talk about "better DRM", but the fact that an average user doesn't notice it doesn't make it good. How many would not notice (or care about) a "phone home" DRM system on their computer? Games do this, and many people don't care. Many people don't care about spywares either ...

Watermarking of files can be an option, but either it is easy to remove or it damages the text (semantic/syntactic watermarking). But I would be ok with watermarking (which doesn't touch the text).



You also said "publishers knows their business better than you" and "they need DRM to make money".

Maybe they feel they can make more money. Maybe they have done the math and found that there are enough clueless users ready to buy their books again when they change devices, or who will never go to the competitor, to make up for those who won't buy because of DRM. If a good salesperson tells a "grandma user" that no, Amazon books won't work with a Sony, the same way Xbox games won't work on a PS3, how many are just going to stick to what the vendor says ?
At the very least they will stick to the store associated to their device, and maybe they will buy the next version of the device to keep their books.



You compared the ebook file formats and DRM with the office software file formats.

Back then each of those office softwares used their own proprietary file format. You couldn't just write software to read those file formats, you had to find out the meaning of each bits and bytes, and it was frowned upon by the companies owning the formats. You used Microsoft Office, you couldn't just switch to a competitor's product because you couldn't properly convert the files. You had to buy the next Microsoft Office, which was great for Microsoft.

But we have a free open standard format for ebooks : epub. This mean anyone can create software to read epub files (and convert them to something else if necessary). The description of an epub file, of how the data is organized, is available to anyone for free.

We have open standards because nobody wants to go back to that complete mess.


You talked about the publishers allowing migration to a new device. How much are they going to charge for this great service? Are they going to ensure the files they distribute are compatible with all devices ? Or only provide migration to business partner's devices ? Epub is the open standard file format, but there is no standard DRM. So if I want to migrate to a device that doesn't support their DRM scheme, are they going to send me a DRM-free epub file? I'd rather have the option of buying the DRM-free epub file in the first place...



About casual sharing, I really doubt people who would upload a book to all their internet friends don't know about file sharing networks and torrents. Same for those who would download it. They would have heard about it, from one of their internet friends. DRM will never stop those who don't want to pay to get a free copy.

But those who pay for a copy, on Baen for instance, would they notice it contains no DRM (would they know what DRM even means)? And then would they suddenly give to random strangers a file they have payed for? They may give it to a small group of relatives, just like it always happened with paper books.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'm saying that publishers shouldn't use DRM because it costs them money and doesn't improve sales.

Most publishers (and their authors) disagree with you. Why should I privilege your opinion over theirs?

[metaltools]

DRM is evil, and metaltools trump stonetools every time!

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I just put Girl with the Dragoon Tattoo into a Google search box and went 5 pages down without finding aan illegal book site. For nmost non techies, that would be the extent oof their capabities.

And that, it would seem, is the end the argument. QED!

Clearly, illegal file sharing is too difficult for the average person to figure it out, so there's no point in bothering with DRM.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Look , the success of Baen is a wonderful thing, but so long as its the ONLY significant success, well, its a hard thing to bet a whole industry, that supports millions of authors and related personnel , on a model that hasn't enjoyed widespread success. Mobileread forum supporters don't have that responsibility, so its easy for them to blithely say, "Leap by faith into the dark. The landing won't be so bad!".
And this over something-DRM- that is more of an annoyance than anything else and can changed to allay the most serious concerns of the digerati.

We're not suggesting anyone leap in the dark. We have given examples that show that DRM is unnecessary and costly, and possible harmful to sales.

We've given data from the music industry, and data from the publishing industry.

DRM is only an annoyance to me because I can strip it. To those who can't or won't, it may become much more than an annoyance.

There are no changes that can be made to DRM that will make it significantly less annoying and risky to consumers.

DRM doesn't stop large scale sharing
If it has any effect on small scale sharing, this is insignificant.
DRM costs publishers money
Dropping DRM doesn't lead to reduced sales.

You haven't given one shred of evidence to support your assertion that publishers are wise to keep DRM. While mentioning at every opportunity that others' statements are only their opinion (whether true or not), you yourself have not given anything except opinion.

Please give some hard data, or admit you have none.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Please give some hard data, or admit you have none.

But the publishers disagree with you. That's all the evidence I need. I'm convinced!

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most publishers (and their authors) disagree with you. Why should I privilege your opinion over theirs?

Because my opinion is based on solid data.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Mom has a pBook she's just finished reading. I've never read anything by that author and borrow the book from her. I read it and I like it and then I decide I want to buy more books from this author to read. Sales happen.

Mom has a DRMed eBook and the DRM is tied to her account and not mine. I don't get to read it, I don't then buy more eBooks from this author. Sales do not happen. The author and publisher lose sales because of the DRM.

So in these cases, no DRM is a good thing and DRM is a bad thing. stonetools, go ahead and prove me wrong.

I think that there are many ways to look at (or borrow a book) that you are interested in. What you have set up is a false dilemma.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Look , the success of Baen is a wonderful thing, but so long as its the ONLY significant success, well, its a hard thing to bet a whole industry, that supports millions of authors and related personnel , on a model that hasn't enjoyed widespread success. Mobileread forum supporters don't have that responsibility, so its easy for them to blithely say, "Leap by faith into the dark. The landing won't be so bad!".
And this over something-DRM- that is more of an annoyance than anything else and can changed to allay the most serious concerns of the digerati.

Baen is not the only example. They're a useful example of a publisher who refuses to use DRM across the board, but there are plenty of examples of individual authors refusing to use DRM (Wil Wheaton, Cory Doctorow who also releases all of his works under Creative Commons licenses, etc) and the publishing houses they use that allow them the option to skip DRM.

This is a leap of faith that has already been taken by individuals, larger companies, and even entire industries, and in every single scenario it has worked out better than keeping the DRM in place. So really the question is not, "Why shouldn't publishers stop using DRM?" but instead, "Why should publishers continue to use DRM when all of the evidence proves that it's more harmful than helpful?"

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most publishers (and their authors) disagree with you. Why should I privilege your opinion over theirs?

Oh — and many publishers and authors also agree with me. But that's irrelevant. Facts aren't decided on majority vote.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by metaltools

DRM is evil, and metaltools trump stonetools every time!

Good one!