Sharing ebooks???

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Umm.... It doesn't matter what YOU think. If a law is in force and you choose to break it you are a criminal.

A little perspective please. Where I live you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and you're not a criminal unless you've been found guilty of breaking a criminal law.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Of course, which means you will be very, very careful. And that is the whole point.

Besides, just as with my gun example, they can then track the file back to you. Just because the file originated with you doesn't automatically make you guilty if it winds up on file sharing site, but they can continue to follow the trail of borrowers down to the real culprit. Exactly the way it should be.

I doubt even Harlan Ellison would go to that much trouble. They'd just get the IP of the uploader and use that as evidence of guilt. Governments of the world are falling over themselves to remove the need for any further evidence in the name of saving money and chasing this mythical $75trillion that is missing from the economy. As long as someone pays the fine, who cares if they are guilty or not?

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Someone would strip it apart, find out where the personal details are kept, then create a tool that will remove them for everyone (or display them for people with an interest in such things, especially if they contain credit card details). Anything like that would be useless without a corresponding law to stop people from removing it.

Yes some people would strip the file apart and remove everything that isn't text and search for anything that looks like it could be a GUID and remove it, but how many people would bother. You can't stop people from violating copyright and some people will chose to do it. The goal should be to maintain a viable marketplace for selling digital goods, it shouldn't be to control to the n'th degree what people do with the product after they paid for it. Security is about placing the appropriate level of a control in place.

I agree that this type of social rights management would probably fail because some companies would try to include personal information in the file (like credit card numbers). When they did that then people would spend the effort to remove the information because there is a chance it will get lost or stolen.

[HansTWN]

Somebody is uploading a copyright protected work using their real IP? Could anyone be that dumb?

I was talking about a watermarked file which is being used to trace the original purchaser. If you share the file with a friend and in the end it winds up on a file sharing site "they" might not care and go after you, but you and those in between can get off the hook by pointing police to the next person in line.

In the end the point is that copyright owners do deserve some protection and some reasonable means of going after the file sharers. If you have that much confidence in your local justice system then I can only advice you not to share ebooks under any circumstances.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Barcey

A little perspective please. Where I live you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and you're not a criminal unless you've been found guilty of breaking a criminal law.

No perspective needed.

It's a statement of truth.

If you want to choose to believe otherwise then you can and you'll fit right in with those who speed through stop signs, cheat on their taxes, lie to congress, stockholders, customers and etc. In other words anything goes as long as you don't get caught. This is EXACTLY the attitude that has resulted in the colossal failure and crisis of society that currently plagues the U.S. (and other countries as well)

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Yes some people would strip the file apart and remove everything that isn't text and search for anything that looks like it could be a GUID and remove it, but how many people would bother. You can't stop people from violating copyright and some people will chose to do it. The goal should be to maintain a viable marketplace for selling digital goods, it shouldn't be to control to the n'th degree what people do with the product after they paid for it. Security is about placing the appropriate level of a control in place.

I agree that this type of social rights management would probably fail because some companies would try to include personal information in the file (like credit card numbers). When they did that then people would spend the effort to remove the information because there is a chance it will get lost or stolen.

Full name would be enough -- credit card numbers change over time, and that would present a security risk. The data could be hidden and be randomly distributed. Sure there always will be ways to remove such items. There are good reasons for removing DRM --- there are no good reasons for removing a watermark. Watermarking would give honest users every right they could reasonably ask for.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

In the end the point is that copyright owners do deserve some protection and some reasonable means of going after the file sharers.

As far as I am aware they have always been able to do that, even in the pre-internet days.

This is all it takes to have links to your work removed from Google searches:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca5...NoticeID=69125

Doesn't look very difficult to me, and could easily be automated so that you wouldn't even need to bother looking for them.

I'm not sure what good prosecuting people would do, it certainly didn't do the music industry's reputation any good when they did it, and didn't have any affect on music piracy whatsoever.

But assuming it was something you wanted to do, there are companies that will collect IP addresses for you and the means of getting the name and address of whoever is connected with that IP is getting a lot easier. Again, there are companies that will do that for you and send out letters demanding compensation for a percentage of the profits raised.

All of this was happening long before the need for any evidence of wrongdoing was removed.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Full name would be enough -- credit card numbers change over time, and that would present a security risk. The data could be hidden and be randomly distributed. Sure there always will be ways to remove such items. There are good reasons for removing DRM --- there are no good reasons for removing a watermark. Watermarking would give honest users every right they could reasonably ask for.

What would be to stop pirate ebook release teams purchasing in the name of their team with stolen credit card details like some warez teams do?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What would be to stop pirate ebook release teams purchasing in the name of their team with stolen credit card details like some warez teams do?

You can never stop those guys anyway -- but you can get the honest users to behave responsibly and to share within strict limits, only.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

You can never stop those guys anyway -- but you can get the honest users to behave responsibly and to share within strict limits, only.

What makes you think they aren't already? Just because something is possible it doesn't mean everyone will do it. Apparently only 10% of the population engages in "file sharing", and I doubt the percentage of those that has any interest in ebooks is particularly high (one survey said 5% of downloaders went for ebooks).

Something being available for free doesn't seem to be much of a barrier to selling it either. If you look at the Sherlock Holmes stories (which can be had for free from mobileread as well as lots of other places) on Amazon you will see that they are the number one sellers in their relevant categories and very high double figures in the "all ebooks that aren't free" list.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Yes some people would strip the file apart and remove everything that isn't text and search for anything that looks like it could be a GUID and remove it, but how many people would bother. You can't stop people from violating copyright and some people will chose to do it. The goal should be to maintain a viable marketplace for selling digital goods, it shouldn't be to control to the n'th degree what people do with the product after they paid for it. Security is about placing the appropriate level of a control in place.

I've been thinking about this myself. The site I'm thinking about will distribute books for free with reminders at the beginning and end of books, perhaps timed reminders as well about donating to the site. Since the books are available for free, I am expecting the metadata about donating to be retained as the books traverse the network.

The only reason I can think of for someone to strip out this metadata would be for mischief and you can't really stop that kind of stuff I believe.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

The site I'm thinking about will distribute books for free with reminders at the beginning and end of books, perhaps timed reminders as well about donating to the site.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "timed reminders" sounds suspiciously like nag-ware. You're not suggesting that people get used to pop-ups during their reading experience are you? Beginning and End I have no problem with.

[elcreative]

Any author wanting to guarantee no income will use nagware... first appearance = delete book and never touch that author again... giggles has really lost the plot and has no appreciation of how most people think... interrupt my reading at your peril... might make an exception for the house burning down but...

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "timed reminders" sounds suspiciously like nag-ware. You're not suggesting that people get used to pop-ups during their reading experience are you? Beginning and End I have no problem with.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "timed reminders" sounds suspiciously like nag-ware. You're not suggesting that people get used to pop-ups during their reading experience are you? Beginning and End I have no problem with.

What about reminders between chapters?

I think the best way to get people to donate is to offer them something extra that they wouldn't otherwise get. An extra free story featuring some of the characters, a "badge" for Facebook, inclusion on the priority/advance reading list for the next book, that sort of thing.

People just wouldn't donate out of the kindness of their hearts, or at least not enough of them would.

What works with the current system, both for realbooks and ebooks, is that some people want to buy them new and some people want them second hand because it's cheaper and they don't mind waiting a bit longer to read them.

There's no real reason why ebook sales couldn't cater to both types of readers. Premium prices while there is enough demand for them, followed by stepped reductions in price as demand drops off until you reach 2nd hand paperback levels. By then the writer will have something new to sell at a premium price, so it all starts again.

[elcreative]

Equal disgust... example, I've just read a book with 40 chapters, 40 damn pay NAGS... I've stopped using software for less than that let alone reading a book... if you want to go the donation ware route then a simple request at either the beginning or, more usefully, the end of the book may do the trick but if your request for payment gets in the way of the reading experience then forget it, the book's deleted and the author goes into the ignore pile, plenty of other books to buy/get and read...

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What about reminders between chapters?