STUDY SHOWS: Ditching DRM could reduce piracy, prices

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by endobenthic

Afternoon:

Since this is somewhat of a philisophical/morality question as well as a practical one ("STUDY SHOWS: Ditching DRM could reduce piracy, prices"), does DRM on library books make any more sense and is it therefor reasonable to expect for you the reader(s)?

Kind of a general question to all here.

Of course.

If I buy a book, I can paint over the cover, write it in, I could even destroy it if I wanted to. It's mine - I bought it.

But if I do that to a library book, I will be charged for it. It's not my book - it's the library's, and I was just borrowing it.

Likewise, it is reasonable for there to be restrictions on a loaned/borrowed ebook because it's not yours.

However, I will say that the fact that DRM is used on books that are sold diminishes the effectiveness of DRM on library ebooks. They use the same DRM protocols that everyone knows how to break. It creates an unfair disadvantage to the libraries, who have no way to protect their books because customers already know how to break DRM due to being forced to do so on the books they've purchased.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Not at all, no. But that is probably because your analogy is flawed from the start.

I don't use a condom with my husband, because after ten years together, neither of us feels we need to (we use another form of birth control). Your condom analogy makes sense only if I out of nowhere suddenly decide that the man who's been mine and only mine for a decade has cheated on me. It would not be good for our marriage if I wasn't willing to give him the benefit of doubt. After all, he's spent over ten years earning that benefit, by earning my trust. And yes, I refuse to believe he'd cheat on me. He's neither stupid or suicidal.

Back to your post, it makes no sense whatsoever. Not only because DRM doesn't work, while condoms do. It makes no sense because condoms are things we use because we have to, DRM is there because others force us to endure it. So to equate DRM to condom use is flat out stupid. It's not even close to relevant.

drm would be like only being able to use the same condom with your partner. if you use a new condom you've gotta switch partners.

[HansTWN]

DRM is more like a chastity belt with a public key....

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

DRM is more like a chastity belt with a public key....

That is just wrong... on so many levels I lack words for it.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by teh603

Sure there is. You've just been sticking to the same arguments over and over again, and we've been picking them apart. But I guess if your only tool is a hammer...

Ah, my dear, you should know that I took great care that you only felt the brush of the wind from the hammer. Only a slight brush of wind...

[OtterBooks]

DRM is like if you ordered waffles at a restaurant, but instead of having the waffles served on a plate they get hurled at you by a bear riding a unicycle.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by frahse

Ah, my dear, you should know that I took great care that you only felt the brush of the wind from the hammer. Only a slight brush of wind...

You know, I thought you actually were here for a rational discussion. Now it's apparent that you're just far too emotionally vested in it to even attempt to make any sense.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I was just made aware recently of some libraries loaning non-drm books.

Sorry to quote myself, but I just noticed that one of my local libraries, now (via Overdrive) now list what appears to be project Guttenberg titles for download without DRM etc...

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Harmon

Dunno. I don't use those esoteric functions. I just read. (EDIT: is there a limit on how much you can clip? If there is, it's Amazon deciding how much fair use to let you have, not you deciding how much you need.)

Originally Posted by OtterBooks

Not sure if there's a limit. I've only used it a few times, and for no more than a couple sentences.

There's definitely a "Clipping Limit" on many Amazon ebooks. It's not really how much you can clip, but rather how many clippings you can take. It's an obvious attempt to thwart someone who might want to "clip" the entire book. But seeing as how the Kindle (nor the desktop apps) can highlight across page turns, someone would have to be very, very dedicated to clip an entire book into a text file. Pirates certainly wouldn't waste their time doing it.

Even though it doesn't really affect me personally, I can certainly see Amazon's clipping limit being a PITA in academic settings.

[OtterBooks]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Even though it doesn't really affect me personally, I can certainly see Amazon's clipping limit being a PITA in academic settings.

I suppose someone could set the text really tiny and clip several pages fairly quickly, like if a teacher wanted to print out an excerpt from the book to pass out. Once it's in a text file, it can be resized or whatever.

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

There's definitely a "Clipping Limit" on many Amazon ebooks. It's not really how much you can clip, but rather how many clippings you can take. It's an obvious attempt to thwart someone who might want to "clip" the entire book. But seeing as how the Kindle (nor the desktop apps) can highlight across page turns, someone would have to be very, very dedicated to clip an entire book into a text file. Pirates certainly wouldn't waste their time doing it.

Even though it doesn't really affect me personally, I can certainly see Amazon's clipping limit being a PITA in academic settings.

You know, it's almost kind of funny how ridiculous that is. Seriously, why would someone do that when it takes 2 seconds to strip the DRM? Do they not realize it's that easy to strip it? How could they not? I'm sure they spend a lot of money on data collection to ascertain this stuff. They would have to be beyond incompetent not to know. Are they just that profoundly paranoid? I'm pretty sure we have some choice names for the combination of irrationality and paranoia.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors

However, I will say that the fact that DRM is used on books that are sold diminishes the effectiveness of DRM on library ebooks. They use the same DRM protocols that everyone knows how to break. It creates an unfair disadvantage to the libraries, who have no way to protect their books because customers already know how to break DRM due to being forced to do so on the books they've purchased.

But the libraries aren't hurt by this; the only hurt would be to the publisher if one considers it a lost sale--assuming someone who's borrowed and read the book would then go out and buy it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Catlady

But the libraries aren't hurt by this; the only hurt would be to the publisher if one considers it a lost sale--assuming someone who's borrowed and read the book would then go out and buy it.

A more likely scenario is the person who "borrows" the book from the library, knowing that they can strip the DRM and keep it, INSTEAD of buying the retail version of the book. That's most assuredly a lost sale.

[Kirtai]

Originally Posted by HarryT

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.

I really don't get this argument. Honest people don't need reminders or help to stay honest. That's why they're called honest people.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Kirtai

I really don't get this argument. Honest people don't need reminders or help to stay honest. That's why they're called honest people.

So why do you have a lock on your front door? You don't really think it's going to stop a burglar, do you?