Tor/Forge Books Announces DRM-Free E-book Store

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's all I've ever been trying to say. Read back through the thread to check if you like.

Stonetools: Publishers couldn't have possibly predicted the explosive popularity of ebooks.
DiapDealer: Sure they could have. Others did.

DiapDialer: Publishers should have predicted the explosive opopularity of ebooks and should have directed ebook expansion

Stonetools: Publishers couldn't have directed the course of the ebook expansion, even if they predicted ebook's explosive popularity.

That's all I'm saying.

[DiapDealer]

DiapDialer: Publishers should have predicted the explosive opopularity of ebooks and should have directed ebook expansion and not stuck their heads in the sand (or blindly accepted the advice/predictions of those like Shatzkin)

Fixed that for you.

Next time you get all confused about what we're arguing about, just ask me. I promise I won't lie about it.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Joykins

Presumably the cost/s of you buying the ebook/s in another format, if you're stripping to format-shift or preserve access.

That implies you would have not been allowed to do that even if the works were not DRMed. If that's so, you ARE getting commercial advantage from it.

My contention in the US is that format shifting and backing up is legal and fair use. It would be legal if the works were not DRMed, and so, stripping the DRM to do it is not illegal.

ApK

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by ApK

That implies you would have not been allowed to do that even if the works were not DRMed. If that's so, you ARE getting commercial advantage from it.

My contention in the US is that format shifting and backing up is legal and fair use. It would be legal if the works were not DRMed, and so, stripping the DRM to do it is not illegal.

ApK

I'm perfectly happy to see that particular devil's advocate position go down in flames; thank you.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

My contention in the US is that format shifting and backing up is legal and fair use. It would be legal if the works were not DRMed, and so, stripping the DRM to do it is not illegal.

ApK

Sadly, the courts disagree with you. The judge in the "RealDVD" case said that although backing up your DVDs is indeed legal, that does not confer a right to remove DRM for the purpose of backing them up.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sadly, the courts disagree with you. The judge in the "RealDVD" case said that although backing up your DVDs is indeed legal, that does not confer a right to remove DRM for the purpose of backing them up.

But that decision pertained to the maker's distribution of the tools, not to the individual's actions in using the tools:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/200...ds-is-illegal/

And even if it were applied to the individual, it seems to conflict with the 5th Court's later interpretation I quoted above, hence all the "seems to be" and "may be" language currently surrounding this.

Again, here's rooting for Class 10B to put this to rest!
(Although it would be sad to allow the use of the tools but still criminalize the creation and distribution of the tools themselves...)

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ApK

but still criminalize the creation and distribution of the tools themselves...)

The creation and distribution of the tools is a criminal offence (in the US) only if done willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

Otherwise it's a civil offence, and the copyright holders would need to bring an action for damages.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

The creation and distribution of the tools is a criminal offence (in the US) only if done willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

Otherwise it's a civil offence, and the copyright holders would need to bring an action for damages.

It occurs to me that after Tor's "Redshirts" release--intended to be DRM-free; DRM still applied at several vendors--publishers who wish to support DRM-free ebooks could release their books to several vendors, announce that they are intended to be DRM-free, and *distribute DRM-stripping software*--because the DMCA kicks in with "(A) to "circumvent a technological measure" means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner" (emphasis added)... if you've got the authority of the copyright owner, DRM removal is legal.

Also, on distribution of same:

(b) Additional Violations.—
(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

Hmm. In the case of Redshirts, the DRM-stripping software is protecting the right of a copyright owner: it's allowing the materials to be copied to alternate devices, as the copyright owner wishes.

It looks like copyright owners are free to say, "If my stuff is DRM'd, I don't want that; please, download this program and remove the DRM."

IANAL. TINLA. Consult someone with a lot more legal authority before trying this argument in court.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

It occurs to me that after Tor's "Redshirts" release--intended to be DRM-free; DRM still applied at several vendors--publishers who wish to support DRM-free ebooks could release their books to several vendors, announce that they are intended to be DRM-free, and *distribute DRM-stripping software*--because the DMCA kicks in with "(A) to "circumvent a technological measure" means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner" (emphasis added)... if you've got the authority of the copyright owner, DRM removal is legal.

Also, on distribution of same:


Hmm. In the case of Redshirts, the DRM-stripping software is protecting the right of a copyright owner: it's allowing the materials to be copied to alternate devices, as the copyright owner wishes.

It looks like copyright owners are free to say, "If my stuff is DRM'd, I don't want that; please, download this program and remove the DRM."

IANAL. TINLA. Consult someone with a lot more legal authority before trying this argument in court.

Interestingly enough, from Scalzi's blog:

Folks, I’m getting some feedback that some online stores are slapping digital rights management on Redshirts, which I am assuming is the fault of some apparatchik in the bowels of their organization not getting the memo. I’ve already alerted Tor about it; I assume once someone gets into the office there that it will be dealt with. In the meantime:

1. Tor Books (and my) intent is to sell the Redshirts eBook DRM-free.

2. If you have a Redshirts eBook that has DRM on it, it’s not something that we asked for or want.

3. If for some unfathomable reason your preferred vendor has put DRM on your copy of the Redshirts eBook, I’m just gonna leave this here for you. [note from Joykins: link to Apprentice Alf's blog redacted by me to comply with mobileread's rules; it's present at the link below]

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/06/0...-re-redshirts/

Well, it'd make an interesting test case should someone decide to enforce that DRM.

[vaughnmr]

Looks like serveral vendors (Sony, Apple, B&N, to name a few) are applying drm to the ebook, against the author's and publisher's wishes, while Amazon does supply the ebook drm-free, at least in the US. I know who I'd buy from.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

Looks like serveral vendors (Sony, Apple, B&N, to name a few) are applying drm to the ebook, against the author's and publisher's wishes, while Amazon does supply the ebook drm-free, at least in the US. I know who I'd buy from.

Whether Amazon provides it DRM-free is unclear; apparently, reports are mixed. (However, if they've DRM'd it, they'll be happy to change the settings and people should be able to re-download with the DRM.) At some time, Sony, Apple and B&N only had DRM'd books; I don't know if any of them have changed that.

It does bring up an interesting legal situation--DRM-cracking software is only a DMCA violation if it's removing protections the copyright owner *wants.* Otherwise, it's just "software for manipulating your digital purchases."

[Joykins]

I own the Redshirts Kindle version but I have no idea how to test it for DRM infestation without substantially reconfiguring my Calibre plugins.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Joykins

I own the Redshirts Kindle version but I have no idea how to test it for DRM infestation without substantially reconfiguring my Calibre plugins.

Download Mobipocket Reader and try to open it with that. Or use one of the various "convert mobi to [whatever]" programs. It won't work on a DRM'd file.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Download Mobipocket Reader and try to open it with that. Or use one of the various "convert mobi to [whatever]" programs. It won't work on a DRM'd file.

Error message
Your file is DRM protected and we therefore are not allowed to convert it.


BUGGER!

I could sent to Macmillan for a DRM-free file, but why bother when I can do that myself quickly and easily?

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Joykins

Error message
Your file is DRM protected and we therefore are not allowed to convert it.

BUGGER!

I could sent to Macmillan for a DRM-free file, but why bother when I can do that myself quickly and easily?

Because then Macmillan gets a better sense of how many people were screwed over by vendor failure to comply with their wishes. Also, it costs them extra work, so they will lean on vendors extra-hard to get it right next time.

It's your only real way of saying "hey, they messed up on this one, too--and I'm someone who cares about this."