STUDY SHOWS: Ditching DRM could reduce piracy, prices

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by xg4bx

lol thats kind of why i don't give money to charity. why should i when 90 cents out of every dollar goes to employees and the ceo. however i would give money directly to someone who needed it.

It depends on the charity. Some have very low overhead.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors

It's true it's creating another copy, but really, how different is it?

It's different because one activity is legal, and the other isn't. You may not consider it immoral to copy eBooks and give those copies to your friends, but it's certainly not legal, and DRM is there precisely because there are people who see nothing wrong in doing it. If people obeyed the law, there would be no need for DRM.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by frahse

Well, there you have it folks. cfrizz is standing tall and proud about his actions, as are many others. I wonder if when misdeeds are done to them, do they just laugh and say "well, I would have done it myself, given the chance." (Actually, we all know that is not so.)

But the real quandary I have is if these people are so adamant that what they are doing is right, and so easy, and at least in cfrizz's case, daring someone to do something about it, why then are they complaining so mightily in outrage, whining and blaming the Sellers, Publishers, and Authors for causing them so much trouble, and even accusing the Sellers, Publishers and Authors of painting them in a bad light.

Maybe the truth is that DRM works. It keeps pilferage down. The evidence is plain if you listen to the caterwauling on this thread. These people are hurting. I feel a little safer.

Just what misdeed have I done? You got your money from my purchasing your book end of story.

My copy is staying in my possession on my reader/tablet/computer. No one else has access to it so it is perfectly safe.

I havn't pilfered anything, I paid for MY copy of the book.

I am an ordinary, non-tech ereader, but after reading about other peoples drm problems, I decided it was in my best financial interest to learn how to ensure that I don't have to make additional purchases of books I have already purchased.

All drm does is force people like me to learn a few simple steps to protect ourselves from being taken advantage of by others.

BTW, I'm a she, not a he.

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's different because one activity is legal, and the other isn't. You may not consider it immoral to copy eBooks and give those copies to your friends, but it's certainly not legal, and DRM is there precisely because there are people who see nothing wrong in doing it. If people obeyed the law, there would be no need for DRM.

So whether or not something is legal makes all the difference? You must have some very shifty ethics, then. The law is not exactly static. I wonder, if you'd lived during the time of alcohol prohibition in the US, if your opinion would have suddenly flipped as soon as it was repealed.

And by the way, according to the law, it's ok to break DRM if you are visually impaired.

I don't share with my friends, really. I recommend books but I've never sent them a copy of anything I paid for - most of my ebooks are freebies or public domain.

However, I will say that I'd be much less tempted to send them my books (all liberated, regardless of how they started) if it weren't for DRM. It's easier to tell someone to go buy something when you know the whole product is good. But that's not the case with DRM'ed ebooks. I know the product is bad - broken in fact - and that it will cause them problems down the line. It's hard for me to recommend that in good conscience.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Of course you can, and that's absolutely fine if that copy is for your own personal use, but you're not suggesting that it would be legal for you to give the photocopy to someone else, are you?

That's the problem with trying to compare this with paper books: if you have a paper book, you're free to pass it around to your friends as much as you want - there's only one book in circulation. It's the fact that multiple copies of the book get created when you do this with eBooks that's the issue.

Not really, because the law still applies. If you are doing something against the law (or the way the law is enforced) is the issue. It's irrelevant as to the form of the object. The same law applies.

Let's turn it on it's head. The way DRM works is like this. When you purchase a book from Dramazon they come to your house and install a special locked bookcase that only you have the key to and only you can read from. You have the key and can read any book you want, but if your wife or children want to read one of your books they can't. They have to buy their own copy and have their own dramazon locked bookcase installed.

My argument is that just because the form is different, should not force me to do anything different than I would using a different form. Please note that copyright is regulated by law, not by format. DRM attempts to control my usage of my legally acquired copyrighted property.

This DRM path has been followed and failed for other industries. It will fail for publishers as well. They can either change their business practices and embrace the change and continue to profit from their business or those companies that do embrace the brave new world will take their place.

As long as they continue to treat me like a criminal I will continue to fight against their practices.

The fact is (as has been said thousands of times on this site) DRM does not prevent piracy or lost sales, it only punished the honest consumers and it must go.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's different because one activity is legal, and the other isn't. You may not consider it immoral to copy eBooks and give those copies to your friends, but it's certainly not legal, and DRM is there precisely because there are people who see nothing wrong in doing it. If people obeyed the law, there would be no need for DRM.

No it's not. No difference. Copyright protects the creator and specifies what uses are legitimate and what are not. It is not legal to copy a full book per copyright law. It has nothing to do with the form.

I know someone is going to take this the wrong way because they did the last time I said it but DRM has absolutely nothing to do with copyright law. It is not part of the law. It is something completely different. It is an attempt by publishers to change and control the way I use a purchase. It is an attempt to change the rules.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kennyc

As long as they continue to treat me like a criminal I will continue to fight against their practices.

Where we disagree is that you consider DRM to be "treating you like a criminal", and I don't. I see it as a gentle reminder to an honest person to stay honest, just like a lock on your front door is. A lock won't prevent a professional burglar from entering your house, but it will remind an honest person that they shouldn't be going there.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Every single one of you just repeated the drm is ineffective against piracy argument. It's true - and irrelevant. Drm is meant to prevent casual sharing by the average user- a much bigger threat. Ok, I'm going to stop here because I need to get on the road and folks either can't or don't want to understand that concept they just want to recycle the argument that they are comfortable with, as if it's a familiar hymn. Cool. I see the personal attacks have restarted too. I think we have all seen the end of this movie. Bye.

Are you EVER going to back up one of your sweeping statements with statistics or evidence of any sort? Now you've decided that casual sharing is a bigger threat than piracy. You've already claimed that most DRM removal is for the purpose of copyright infringement, not fair use, and that there are "many" products whose use is restricted the way books are restricted by DRM.

And when you are challenged on a specific point, you simply ignore it, whine, and play the victim card. It's really gotten old.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Where we disagree is that you consider DRM to be "treating you like a criminal", and I don't. I see it as a gentle reminder to an honest person to stay honest, just like a lock on your front door is. A lock won't prevent a professional burglar from entering your house, but it will remind an honest person that they shouldn't be going there.

But the problem is, as you well know, when the company decides not to support the DRM any more, or they go out of business, or your reader breaks or you want to do something they don't want you to do, like read my kindle books on my xoom. THAT is the REAL Difference. It's like the Patriot Act. You are guilty until proven innocent, we'll go ahead and put the shackles on just in case you decide to break the law.

The point is that DRM is a problem for the average person. It may not bother you at the moment, but unless you are already stripping it, I can assure you it will.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kennyc

The point is that DRM is a problem for the average person. It may not bother you at the moment, but unless you are already stripping it, I can assure you it will.

I strip DRM from every book that I buy, as soon as I buy it. But I have non-technical friends who have Kindles who probably don't even know that DRM exists - they buy books from the Kindle bookstore and they read them on their Kindles. DRM is not a problem for them, and Amazon is unlikely to be disappearing any time soon.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I strip DRM from every book that I buy, as soon as I buy it. But I have non-technical friends who have Kindles who probably don't even know that DRM exists - they buy books from the Kindle bookstore and they read them on their Kindles. DRM is not a problem for them, and Amazon is unlikely to be disappearing any time soon.

Good. I thought so. And I do understand what you are saying, but those that don't know it exists are very likely to get burned by it at some point and then they will know. Or they will find out by those that do know speaking out against it. And regardless of the claim that Amazon is too big to fail* that actual issue has happened and could easily happen again. Amazon is NOT your friend they just want your money.

*(maybe we could bail them out like Wall Street should it happen)

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Good. I thought so. And I do understand what you are saying, but those that don't know it exists are very likely to get burned by it and then they will know. Or but those that do know speaking out against it. And regardless of the claim that Amazon is too big to fail that actual issue has happened and could easily happen again. Amazon is NOT your friend they just want your money.

I have nothing at all against DRM removal for personal use. It happens to be legal to remove DRM in the UK, but I would not be deterred from doing so were that not to be the case.

What I do have an issue with is DRM removal for the purpose of just giving a copy of a book to a couple of your friends. They give copies to their friends, and it quickly reaches the point where you have a serious piracy issue.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Here is an example of someone (Purple Lady) having a problem right now with DRM they she should not have to be dealing with!

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=152852

Good point. I had the same problem when I changed the credit card associated with the BN account; luckily it was early on and I didn't have too many books to redownload. But it was one of the main reasons that I decided to routinely strip DRM from every book--originally I had just done it to convert a handful of Amazon books I'd had through Kindle4PC.

So there was an unintended consequence of DRM. I didn't want to share books with friends, I didn't want to upload books to a file-sharing site, I didn't even want to go to another bookstore. I just wanted to ensure that I would be able to access my own books in the future without additional hassle.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I have nothing at all against DRM removal for personal use. It happens to be legal to remove DRM in the UK, but I would not be deterred from doing so were that not to be the case.

What I do have an issue with is DRM removal for the purpose of just giving a copy of a book to a couple of your friends. They give copies to their friends, and it quickly reaches the point where you have a serious piracy issue.

Agreed giving a copy to a friend is a theft, it also quickly becomes something that runs
counter to human nature. While people may be generous and willing to aid those in
need, they are reluctant to be taken advantage of. We may not be as possessive as a
Dalic, but we humans tend to want to keep the things we purchase for our own use.

As to your oblivious friends ensnared by Amazon, my condolences.

Luck;
Ken

[OtterBooks]

Originally Posted by kennyc

When you purchase a book from Dramazon they come to your house and install a special locked bookcase that only you have the key to and only you can read from.

That sounds awesome imo.