How do you feel about DRM?

[GreenMonkey]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

If it wasn't for a certain apprentice (Alf by name) who can tell you how to remove the locks entirely, I wouldn't be buying any ebooks from Amazon.

Buying DRM supports DRM. I do it as little as possible, even though I can remove the DRM if needed. I bought an Kindle ebook for my wife for $14.99 the other day, violating both my pricing rules and my no-DRM rules. I would have bought the hardcover for $18ish instead if it was for myself. But it was a present. Still, I felt guilty supporting DRM.

I do the same with PC games - I buy pretty much zero PC games now due to onerous DRM, or at the minimum, Steam DRM. But I love buying DRM free classic games from GOG.com.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by GreenMonkey

Buying DRM supports DRM.

People say they don't care about DRM because they can remove it easily, but that is not what business people look at when they are judging sales and how successful products are. They'll point to the million dollar sales, and go "Absolutely, we don't need to change a thing!"

And many people don't care about DRM, many people that I know have had to ask "What is DRM?". They just want to know how to work their e-Reader.

[Katsunami]

The catch is that if you don't buy a book because it has drm, then the publisher will think that it sells badly because the story is crap... This can certainly happen to new books, or newer authors.

And GOG.com.... They are "zee zjit" as the Germans would say They prove that you can make loads of money selling stuff without drm, at low prices, even if it's very old. If I want to suddenly play an old game (I have a very rare affliction, called "Bouts of Nostalgia"), then I'll just buy it at Gog.com for $3 or $5. As their games are fully patched up, often adjusted to run under Windows7 and include lots of extras, I won't even start looking for pirated versions.

I actually bought some games I have on CD already, to easily get a good quality mp3 sound track... And have a fully patched, "no CD required"-version to boot.

No drm. No hassle. Good user experience. No restrictions. Nice extra's. Low prices.

That will cause you to sell for millions. Gog.com proves it.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

The catch is that if you don't buy a book because it has drm, then the publisher will think that it sells badly because the story is crap... This can certainly happen to new books, or newer authors.

And GOG.com.... They are "zee zjit" as the Germans would say They prove that you can make loads of money selling stuff without drm, at low prices, even if it's very old. If I want to suddenly play an old game (I have a very rare affliction, called "Bouts of Nostalgia"), then I'll just buy it at Gog.com for $3 or $5. As their games are fully patched up, often adjusted to run under Windows7 and include lots of extras, I won't even start looking for pirated versions.

I actually bought some games I have on CD already, to easily get a good quality mp3 sound track... And have a fully patched, "no CD required"-version to boot.

No drm. No hassle. Good user experience. No restrictions. Nice extra's. Low prices.

That will cause you to sell for millions. Gog.com proves it.

It is a principled stand, and I admire it. But if there is stuff I want to read I will still get DRMed books. Paper really isn't an option where I live, and by now I just don't want to go back. But I would NOT get them if I couldn't remove the DRM.

[CyGuy]

I also believe that if you purchase an ebook that is infected with DRM, you are actually paying for the DRM too! I mean cash out of your pocket for including DRM. Sure, it is easy enough to remove the infection but you still paid for it!

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

I also believe that if you purchase an ebook that is infected with DRM, you are actually paying for the DRM too! I mean cash out of your pocket for including DRM. Sure, it is easy enough to remove the infection but you still paid for it!

With Kindle books you paid for Amaozn's R&D on the DRM system they use.

Adobe DRM costs the distributors $0.22 per ebook sold. (And that's neglecting the capital costs of buying Adobe Content Server software.)

[Katsunami]

So in the end, a few parties make big bucks with drm, some other parties are losing the same bucks because drm does not work and adds nothing, while the end result is a bunch of very annoyed customers.

Well done, industries

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

So in the end, a few parties make big bucks with drm, some other parties are losing the same bucks because drm does not work and adds nothing, while the end result is a bunch of very annoyed customers.

Well done, industries

There is always a few parties that make big bucks. At least a bookstore has the choice to sell books without DRM. Imagine if the government would step in and make it illegal to sell books that do not have the new government-DRM on them, plus adding big fines for selling without DRM and adding a big DRM-tax on top of that. Better to keep the DRM in private hands - if they step over the line or creating a monopoly, there is laws that might be used against them ...

[calibrated]

Here's a real-life example of why I think DRM is nuts:

Today, I bought a book from the B&N Nook store (because it wasn't available otherwise). I loaded it onto my Kindle Fire and fired up the Nook app, which I sideloaded months ago. The app refused to open the book, saying "try again later." I tried to open the file on my PC at work with the Nook for PC app, and it wouldn't open it either. It *did* open on my iMac at home, using the Nook for Mac app, but then the app froze.

So I did what any self-respecting e-book geek would do: I added it to my Calibre library, stripping out the DRM in the process, and stuck the de-DRM'd file in Dropbox. Then after downloading it from Dropbox, I opened it using Aldiko on the Fire. Worked like a charm...

So tell me: what, exactly, was achieved by the use of DRM here, except to annoy me, the paying customer? Not much. And I'm going to think twice before buying anything from the Nook store again, too. Way to go, Barnes & Noble...

[RoboRay]

Was the "DRM is a useful tool that prevents piracy" option intended to be hilarious, or did it just work out that way?

[spindlegirl]

Absolutely intended to be hilarious, and i hope the one who selected it was responding in kind

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

Absolutely intended to be hilarious, and i hope the one who selected it was responding in kind

I think that there one or two people on MobileRead who really do think that DRM is a good idea. Sort of anti-Giggletons.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Harmon

I think that DRM is a temporary nuisance, and will ultimately become irrelevant, just as it has in the music industry.

Do you think that's true even for library books. It's difficult to see how eBook library lending could operate without DRM; library books have to "expire" at the end of their loan period.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I think that there one or two people on MobileRead who really do think that DRM is a good idea. Sort of anti-Giggletons.

Yes, I do think it's a good idea - for library books. To repeat the question I've just asked Harmon, how could a library lend eBooks without DRM?

[WT Sharpe]

I voted for the second (majority) option, although I feel "evil" is the wrong word to use here. I don't think the people who came up with the idea were being necessarily malicious. They were looking for a way to protect the rights of authors, publishers, and sellers. Putting DRM into books is shortsighted and counter-productive—as it doesn't stop piracy, but rather angers and alienates legitimate purchasers—but it's not evil. It appears to be one of the biggest bonehead blunders the industry ever committed, and the decision to continue with the scheme may reveal a lack of sound judgment, but their heart may be in the right place. As has been said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.