How do you feel about DRM?

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

I am cool with authors having copyright, many people are. The fact that I will still borrow e-books and yet BUY printed books shows that I too, am cool with authors having copyright.

My beef with DRM for books that I buy is entirely about personal use. Entirely. I have this weird sense of entitlement that if I buy a book, I should be able to keep it. So I buy the printed book.

Seems the authors don't have issues with me keeping the printed one even if my bookshelf gets vandalized. So I buy the item that gives me the most personal freedom and permanence of use. So far, DRM infested books don't fit that bill for me. Too many restrictions and legal loopholes for me.

I can understand authors and publishers not wanting books to be pirated, honestly I do. But holding paying customers hostage because of it isn't gonna work. Most people don't have "a pirate site". Most people just want to buy their book and keep the darned thing.

I have purchased many ebooks and have felt a sense of ownership over every one. I also understand that just like printed books I don't have unlimited right to do whatever I like with them or share them with any and everyone I like. Printed books have their own drm- the physical properties of the book make it more difficult to " share" the book. The legal restrictions on sharing are precisely the same .

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I have purchased many ebooks and have felt a sense of ownership over every one. I also understand that just like printed books I don't have unlimited right to do whatever I like with them or share them with any and everyone I like. Printed books have their own drm- the physical properties of the book make it more difficult to " share" the book. The legal restrictions on sharing are precisely the same .

Umm, no.
eBooks are licensed. The licenses from most popular stores do not allow for any sort of lending or sharing, or for reselling.
A book is owned. I can l lend it to whomever I choose, and resell it at will.
The legal restrictions on copying may be the same.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

But, to be fair, this (and the previous post) is a complaint about bad DRM systems, which the Adept/ADE combo is. If the DRM had been completely transparent, and the book just magically appeared on your Kindle/iThing, you probably wouldn't have had have such a strong response.

There are people who mistakenly purchase printed books who have problems returning them too. Oddly enough no one goes around complaining that the whole system of buying books online needs to be scrapped . Rather they say that the system needs to be improved. Big difference that.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by stonetools

the physical properties of the book make it more difficult to " share" the book. The legal restrictions on sharing are precisely the same .

The physical properties of the printed book actually make it very EASY to share the book. I can just hand it to them. No copy is being made, and the person can just read it and hand it back to me when they are done.

(I am talking from the perspective of someone who has no desire to break the law. Clearly if I wanted to break the law, I could do so with the click of a mouse).

The fact that an e-book requires copying to "share" makes it so that the legal restrictions on sharing are extremely different. To share an e-book, automatically makes a copy of it, by its very nature. So the properties of it alone change the legalities of "sharing" without even trying. With an e-book, sharing IS copying.

With a DRM book, I would have to loan my whole physical e-reader to someone to share one book, legally. (and I do loan my e-reader itself to my children if I am not currently using it, or making dinner or something).

Since the flexibility to share and own a printed book is easier to do so without breaking the law, then that is the format I choose to (mostly) hand my money over to publishers and authors for.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

But, to be fair, this (and the previous post) is a complaint about bad DRM systems, which the Adept/ADE combo is. If the DRM had been completely transparent, and the book just magically appeared on your Kindle/iThing, you probably wouldn't have had have such a strong response.

I don't believe a good DRM system is possible. That is, one that does not cause the person who buys a copy of the ebook problems now or in the future.

Originally Posted by stonetools

I have purchased many ebooks and have felt a sense of ownership over every one.

Then you are naïve, or have never bought an ebook with DRM.

DRMed ebooks are not sold, but licensed. You have no ownership of the book, and your license to read to book might be revoked at any time.

In addition, you may not resell the book. I don't beleive that you can said to own something if you don't also have the right to sell it.

Originally Posted by stonetools

Printed books have their own drm- the physical properties of the book make it more difficult to " share" the book. The legal restrictions on sharing are precisely the same .

Read the licensing terms at any of the major ebook sellers. You may not lend ebooks in the same way as paper books.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Umm, no.
eBooks are licensed. The licenses from most popular stores do not allow for any sort of lending or sharing, or for reselling.
A book is owned. I can l lend it to whomever I choose, and resell it at will.
The legal restrictions on copying may be the same.

Correct . I would add that to "share" a digital file you MUST make a copy. When people talk about lending or giving away an ebook what they really mean is making a copy of the file and transferring it to someone else

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I don't believe a good DRM system is possible. That is, one that does not cause the person who buys a copy of the ebook problems now or in the future.

It will vary by person, but for me Amazon's DRM system is a good one (or at least miles ahead of ADE). I can buy a book on my PC, iPad or NC and read it on any of the others. The way Whispernet works means that the book just appears, I don't have to connect to a computer to get it.
Is it ideal? No. I'd rather be able to read the book in a different client app, as the Kindle one is rather lacking.
But of the current DRM systems around, it is the one I'd rather use.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Umm, no.
eBooks are licensed. The licenses from most popular stores do not allow for any sort of lending or sharing, or for reselling.
A book is owned. I can l lend it to whomever I choose, and resell it at will.
The legal restrictions on copying may be the same.

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I don't believe a good DRM system is possible. That is, one that does not cause the person who buys a copy of the ebook problems now or in the future.




Then you are naïve, or have never bought an ebook with DRM.

DRMed ebooks are not sold, but licensed. You have no ownership of the book, and your license to read to book might be revoked at any time.

In addition, you may not resell the book. I don't beleive that you can said to own something if you don't also have the right to sell it.




Read the licensing terms at any of the major ebook sellers. You may not lend ebooks in the same way as paper books.

I understand that ebooks are licensed. Indeed one of my pet peeves is that thanks to " convenient " one click purchasing, people are misled into thinking that they are " buying" an ebook when what they are buying is access to a file . If it were up to me one click buying would be banned and you would have to read in banner headline font the following before you buy:

THIS IS NOT A PURCHASE OF TiTlLE. This is a purchase of a license to access a file. Do you understand this and do you accept it?

This would cut down a lot on the misunderstanding and the bull%%%.

I understand why the booksellers and the publishers opted for speed and ease over full disclosure. But land sakes a mercy, they have unleashed an unending tsunami of nonsense on these internets.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Correct . I would add that to "share" a digital file you MUST make a copy. When people talk about lending or giving away an ebook what they really mean is making a copy of the file and transferring it to someone else

There is nothing in the Amazon DRM system that prevents resale of books. They already have the ability to remove a book from your account and devices, if you ask for a refund. They could use that to implement a system where I could transfer ownership of the book. They already do this on a short term basis with lending.
(I understand that they have a business reason for not doing this, but there is not a technological one for not doing it)

[paulsalter]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It will vary by person, but for me Amazon's DRM system is a good one (or at least miles ahead of ADE). I can buy a book on my PC, iPad or NC and read it on any of the others. The way Whispernet works means that the book just appears, I don't have to connect to a computer to get it.
Is it ideal? No. I'd rather be able to read the book in a different client app, as the Kindle one is rather lacking.
But of the current DRM systems around, it is the one I'd rather use.

not sure how this works on other Kobo models, but the above is how it works for me on my Vox

Buy a book on my Vox, Mac or iPod, the book is automatically available on all 3 devices, no need for a computer to sync them

I can totally ignore that they have DRM, dont need to think about it, for backup purposes I do place everything I buy into Calibre, which strips out the DRM when doing this

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I understand why the booksellers and the publishers opted for speed and ease over full disclosure. But land sakes a mercy, they have unleashed an unending tsunami of nonsense on these internets.

I'm not sure that you do understand. Don't forget that if ebook sales are sales of licenses and not sales of copies, then most contracts specify a much higher percentage cut to the author for sales of licences than sales of copies.

Eminem recently won a case to do with this on music sales.

Publishers (of music and books) currently want it both ways. When talking to content providers (authors, musicians) electronic sales are just another sale, like a hardback or a CD. When talking to end users, electronic sales are licences, completely different to sales of hardback and CDs.

It'll get settled eventually, but we're definitely in early days and the rules haven't been sorted out yet.

[WT Sharpe]

stonetools,

In your bio section here at MobileRead it states, "Rep, Apple, Publishers, Amazon, etc, etc." Do you represent publishers and resellers in a professional capacity? This isn't a moderator question, I'm just curious.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Correct . I would add that to "share" a digital file you MUST make a copy. When people talk about lending or giving away an ebook what they really mean is making a copy of the file and transferring it to someone else

That is not accurate. The only copy of a particular file could be on removable media, and the media could be loaned as-is. You could also loan someone your ereader device. You could also cut and paste, instead of copy and paste.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Current DRM is a minor annoyance to those that care about it.
The masses don't care.
Those that care also know to avoid it or remove it.
That basically makes it irrelevant.

I think that *this* pretty much sums up the state of DRM for e-books. It's hard to view it as really "evil" when it is such a minor annoyance.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

stonetools,

In your bio section here at MobileRead it states, "Rep, Apple, Publishers, Amazon, etc, etc." Do you represent publishers and resellers in a professional capacity? This isn't a moderator question, I'm just curious.

Actually I meant that as a joke since I have been accused of Being every one of those things - often in the same thread. Guess I should change that .