DRM Good or Bad?

[frahse]

What the heck?

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by ApK

"How can I get more people to buy my books?" can potentially be answered in part with "By not letting quite so many of the customers get it for free quite so easily."

That's a potential start, but it doesn't follow that someone prevented from getting a free copy is going to pay for the same content. (But otherwise, yes, you make cogent arguments.)

It is a fact that many authors who sell ebooks with DRM, even some with Amazon exclusives, do very well. The Kindle ecosystem is working. It's bringing in readers and selling books. Same with the Nook. The arguments in your post above will not sway authors, in the face of that reality. I fear they may even do more harm than good.

At this point, I'm not worried about convincing authors. I'm swimming in reading material, more than I have time for. I'd be concerned about what my kids will be reading in another decade or two, but the whole publishing industry is in such chaos I don't think any particular current methods of acquiring literature are going to be relevant.

[Pinkticket]

I originally put all of my self published books on DRM - but I quickly learned it can be taken off in a minute or less. There are even websites that tell you how to do it.

So it strikes me as being no real protection at all - and I have had complaints from readers who say they will not buy a book if it is on DRM. Consequently, I no longer use it.

[Synamon]

Originally Posted by ApK

Sharing is one way that authors get new fans, not the only way, and sharing of pbooks does not result from the easy duplication afforded by ebooks which legitimately does raise the likelihood of negating a sale because getting an infringing copy for free was the easiest of all options.

I absolutely agree that "getting an infringing copy for free is the easiest of all options". Not from sharing though, anyone with a computer can download pirated ebooks. DRM free in whatever format you want, right to your Downloads folder in under a minute. Sweet. This is the part of the equation everyone is trying to pretend doesn't exist. It is easier to download a pirated copy of a book than it is to buy it. No credit card, no account, no geographic restrictions, no DRM. This is what authors who want to get people to buy their book are competing with.

Customers from only Amazon could be enough to let any author retire comfortably, and Amazon's shopping experience, samples, recommendation, one-click buying, etc, could easily make up for the losses from sharing.
Plus add in B&N, Kobo and (blech) iBooks.

Cashing in on the ease of online purchases is something authors should be focused on. It's the good side of the digital content coin, piracy is the bad.

Why "blech" for iBooks? It's the most locked down format, shouldn't you be praising it?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

At this point, I'm not worried about convincing authors.

Stick with me, I think we're this close to turning frahse.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Synamon

I absolutely agree that "getting an infringing copy for free is the easiest of all options". Not from sharing though, anyone with a computer can download pirated ebooks. DRM free in whatever format you want, right to your Downloads folder in under a minute. Sweet. This is the part of the equation everyone is trying to pretend doesn't exist.

No one is pretending it doesn't exist. Everyone is agreeing that we're not likely to stop it, and DRM is essentially irrelevant to that kind of piracy.

It is easier to download a pirated copy of a book than it is to buy it. No credit card, no account, no geographic restrictions, no DRM. This is what authors who want to get people to buy their book are competing with.

I realize it's hard for some people to believe, but most people do not know their way around the darknet, could not get a torrent if they wanted to, and could not find a way to get stuff from a downloaded RAR file to their reader with two hands a map and a flashlight.

They find it very easy to push "Buy now" and they find it just as easy...and free...to let their book club friend or brother-in-law who has a book they want make a copy and put it on their reader for them.

Why "blech" for iBooks? It's the most locked down format, shouldn't you be praising it?

...only if I were to undergo a 180 degree change of opinion.
(For reference, see, well, just about every other post I've made in this thread.)

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by ApK

No one is pretending it doesn't exist. Everyone is agreeing that we're not likely to stop it, and DRM is essentially irrelevant to that kind of piracy.


I realize it's hard for some people to believe, but most people do not know their way around the darknet, could not get a torrent if they wanted to, and could not find a way to get stuff from a downloaded RAR file to their reader with two hands a map and a flashlight.

They find it very easy to push "Buy now" and they find it just as easy...and free...to let their book club friend or brother-in-law who has a book they want make a copy and put it on their reader for them.


...only if I were to undergo a 180 degree change of opinion.
(For reference, see, well, just about every other post I've made in this thread.)

Well everyone seems to have an opinion. How many of the gainsayers have ever complained about DRM to their publisher or distributor? If not maybe now would be a good time to do it. Send off a polite, nicely worded email to whoever is asking you to put DRM on your work and tell them what you have said in this post. Maybe the groundswell of opinion will put an end to DRM.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

[...]Copyright law is a *mess* right now. It wasn't designed to deal with easy-instant copies, and it assumes that if you legitimately acquired a copy, you can legitimately transfer ownership, temporarily or permanently, to someone else.

(As I have suggested in a previous post) It could be argued that DRM is one way in which such publishers are aiding their customers: DRM tells the customer they have at least these rights; rights beyond what DRM permits may be questionable; follow what DRM permits and you will be safe. This paints DRM as a feature, a customer service. Even for me, that's probably pushing things too far, but it's what you are going to get if you want to start arguing about the complexity of copyright law.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

[...]Where are the high sales numbers for any author whose works aren't pirated?

Do any exist? Are there figures showing "block-buster" sales for authors whose works do not have DRM? How do they stack up against the really big names for those whose works usually have DRM? This is the sort of thing I was referring to as evidence. I don't have it, do you? It seems to me that we are both arguing in the dark here, both us referring only to anecdotal evidence and a "feel" for what the larger picture might be. Without such evidence the circles of this thread, and others, are all that is left to us.

[frahse]

I told someone this.
Up in #361, I had a neat "stinging" quote for you DRM marauders, but then I thought I would have to explain it a lot, and certainly would have to defend it, and all without the slightest chance of changing any minds here so I didn't bother.

Anyway, I personally remain steadfast in my belief that DRM is good and viable and here to stay for the foreseeable future (say at least 10 years).

And one parting shot (again by the way). Can you name any significant writers that eschew DRM?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by frahse

I told someone this.
Up in #361, I had a neat "stinging" quote for you DRM marauders, but then I thought I would have to explain it a lot, and certainly would have to defend it, and all without the slightest chance of changing any minds here so I didn't bother.

Anyway, I personally remain steadfast in my belief that DRM is good and viable and here to stay for the foreseeable future (say at least 10 years).

And one parting shot (again by the way). Can you name any significant writers that eschew DRM?

Been hiding under that old rock during the last few days? We just had the Harry Potter ebooks come out without DRM, only protected by watermarking.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

That's a potential start, but it doesn't follow that someone prevented from getting a free copy is going to pay for the same content. (But otherwise, yes, you make cogent arguments.)

I have to fully agree. A book I might read for free does not mean I'd pay for it. I might decide that the price is too high or I've other books I'd rather spend my money on.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Synamon

Why "blech" for iBooks? It's the most locked down format, shouldn't you be praising it?

The DRM for iBooks eBooks has already been broken.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by gmw

(As I have suggested in a previous post) It could be argued that DRM is one way in which such publishers are aiding their customers: DRM tells the customer they have at least these rights; rights beyond what DRM permits may be questionable; follow what DRM permits and you will be safe. This paints DRM as a feature, a customer service. Even for me, that's probably pushing things too far, but it's what you are going to get if you want to start arguing about the complexity of copyright law.

All DRM is doing is telling the customer that you are a crook before you've even bought the product.

Publisher: I don't trust you. You are a potential crook. So I'm going to restrict your access to a product you bought legally
Customer: Fine, I'll go get it from another source where your locks have been removed and not pay for it.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

All DRM is doing is telling the customer that you are a crook before you've even bought the product.

Publisher: I don't trust you. You are a potential crook. So I'm going to restrict your access to a product you bought legally
Customer: Fine, I'll go get it from another source where your locks have been removed and not pay for it.

I think your argument is specious and ill-informed. (The emphasis, in case there is any misunderstanding about my motives, is on the word 'argument' or - to use another word - 'persuasion')

When I organize debating teams, I impress upon my students that they need to understand another individual's argument in order to impress upon that person a feeling of respect for one's position, so that one can then proceed to say something like this: "...and here is why I disagree with your position...."

Having a sense of respect for one's position [understanding that position and why a person would hold such a position] is one of the underlying tenets for arguing successfully for a different position. When one uses a sentence such as "You are a potential crook," to further an argument, then one's argumentative stanch is less effective than if one used the three underlying appeals of pathos, logos, and ethos. (Of course, one could argue that there is NO respect for another individual's position. However, such a position - which is your position, as I see it - will be less effective since you are using only an emotional appeal to further your argument.)

By engaging in the three appeals of rhetorical argumentative persuasion - ethos [ethical], pathos [emotion], and logos [logic], one can build a sound argument with appeals to the character of the speaker, the sense of emotional appeal, and to an appeal of reason.

If one uses these three appeals and composes an argument that is 'sound,' there is a better chance of convincing other people of your position, and of actually gaining more people who share one's belief in an issue, but who may be undecided about that issue - or any issue, for that matter.



Don

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by gmw

Do any exist? Are there figures showing "block-buster" sales for authors whose works do not have DRM?

Doctorow, who releases his works under Creative Commons, is doing fine. Bujold's works, sold through Baen, are doing well. Konrath .... (Konrath is perhaps not a "blockbuster" author. But anyone who pulls 6 figures doing self-published midlist ebooks should get attention from publishers; they should be asking themselves "how many more of our books can do this?")

It's hard to get data because the "big 6" publishers won't allow non-DRM'd works except in very special cases (Doctorow can set his own terms), so there are very few non-DRM'd books that have the marketing power of a big publisher behind them to compare with the others. But the few that do have the same kind of promotion and industry attention (Locus won't review self-published books) seem to do fine.

How do they stack up against the really big names for those whose works usually have DRM? This is the sort of thing I was referring to as evidence. I don't have it, do you? It seems to me that we are both arguing in the dark here, both us referring only to anecdotal evidence and a "feel" for what the larger picture might be. Without such evidence the circles of this thread, and others, are all that is left to us.

Anecdotal evidence is indeed not hard data... but the anecdotal evidence all points the same direction.

Several small publishers, Baen being the largest, have "experimented" with non-DRM ebooks. None of them have yet come out and said, "this just isn't working; we're going to add DRM from now on."