Lending DRM'd books to a friend

[TheJohnNewton]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

The ability to lend is *not* part of the price calculation of books. It may be part of your perceived value, but when publishers decide how much to charge, it's not part of the formula. There's only one place where it *is* part of the formula... library sales. Where they do indeed charge more then to consumers because the libraries lend the books.

So how can you suggest that the inability to lend an ebook should lead to drastically lower ebook prices? Since it's not part of the pricing formula to begin with, where is this cost saving going to come from?

It would only work for the publisher if the prevention of lending leads to more sales. Will that prove out in the real world, I don't know.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I have followed up with another email:

Spoiler:

Dear Kobo Customer Care,

Thank you for your response to my question, but it seems to be a technical rather than legal answer to my question. Obviously no-one is able read my books (the DRMed ones, anyway) unless they have access to my account, i.e. have a device authorised to my Adobe ID.

But I am asking about the licence terms.

May I let my spouse read ebooks that I have bought (on a device authorised to my Adobe ID)?
May I let my children read ebooks that I have bought (on a device authorised to my Adobe ID)?
May I let a close friend read ebooks that I have bought (on a device authorised to my Adobe ID)?

I'm sorry to go on about this, but I do want to understand how many copies of an ebook you expect a household to buy if everyone in the household wants to read it. Your licence terms seem to imply that a copy needs to be bought for everyone who wants to read the ebook.

Yours,

Paul Durrant.

I have a reply from Kobo! A rather astonishing reply!

Originally Posted by Kobo

Hi Paul,

Thank you for contacting Kobo Customer Care.

Legally, only the account holder has license to use the material.

Hope this clarifies.

Sincerely,
The Kobo Team

[Piper_]

Amazing

Your question was so perfectly specific, kobo's answer is either a legal dodge to avoid ticking off publishers, or kobo really requires even spouses and their kids to buy their own copies.

surely they know that would be called
outrageous by the public.

[jusmee]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

The ability to lend is *not* part of the price calculation of books. It may be part of your perceived value, but when publishers decide how much to charge, it's not part of the formula. There's only one place where it *is* part of the formula... library sales. Where they do indeed charge more then to consumers because the libraries lend the books.

So how can you suggest that the inability to lend an ebook should lead to drastically lower ebook prices? Since it's not part of the pricing formula to begin with, where is this cost saving going to come from?

The formula is faulty.

[jusmee]

Originally Posted by Piper_

Amazing

Your question was so perfectly specific, kobo's answer is either a legal dodge to avoid ticking off publishers, or kobo really requires even spouses and their kids to buy their own copies.

surely they know that would be called
outrageous by the public.

Outrageous is right. Also, it means if Kobo go belly up, you can no longer legally read your books.

[ottdmk]

At least with Kobo both Kobo & Adobe would have to go under to fully lose access. Don't forget that the license is not with Kobo... it's with the publisher.

[jusmee]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

At least with Kobo both Kobo & Adobe would have to go under to fully lose access. Don't forget that the license is not with Kobo... it's with the publisher.

Technically you are right, but Kobo's statement seemed to refer to you Kobo account - so even if you had the technology to open the book, legally, maybe not.

[maxiart]

Originally Posted by jusmee

I would have thought the time limit was important to the people controlling the DRM. The point was to work within the rules and still be able to lend it to a friend.

Why care about whats important to them, when they clearly don't care about you? They only care about how much money they can milk out of you.

Sorry, but being unable to lend your books is just stupid. Worse, its the kind of stupidity that makes pirating enticing.

[murg]

Originally Posted by maxiart

Sorry, but being unable to lend your books is just stupid. Worse, its the kind of stupidity that makes pirating enticing.

Worse, its the kind of stupidity that makes pirating necessary.

[murg]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

The ability to lend is *not* part of the price calculation of books. It may be part of your perceived value, but when publishers decide how much to charge, it's not part of the formula.

Part of any price calculation on the part of a vendor is what its customers will pay for something. Which explains Apple's iWhatever pricing.

Used physical books can be read, loaned, and sold to used books stores for approx 1/4 of their cover price. They can even be donated to libraries...

[ottdmk]

That still doesn't add up to "the inability to lend means that ebook prices should be slashed."

Now, it's true that a case can be made for right of sale for used ebooks. Don't see that happening anytime soon either. It's the lending problem but worse: how can you ever know that the individual has actually sold *their* copy of the book, and not a copy they made?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

Now, it's true that a case can be made for right of sale for used ebooks. Don't see that happening anytime soon either. It's the lending problem but worse: how can you ever know that the individual has actually sold *their* copy of the book, and not a copy they made?

The same applies to CDs. How can one ever be sure that the person selling the CD hasn't kept a copy of the CD?

[echwel]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

The same applies to CDs. How can one ever be sure that the person selling the CD hasn't kept a copy of the CD?

And that's why Dutch government has invented the so called
home-copy-levy (if Google-translate has given me an non-understandable word: I mean a kind of tax). In the Netherlands it is (still) allowed to make a home-copy of a cd or anything like it.
It is not allowed to publish or sell that copy, nor is it allowed to decode it if it is in any way copy-protected.

Still, nobody can just plainly know if you did not make a copy, en keep using that, actually today that is allowed! You can also copy, for example, the music to your computer, and use it. You are also allowed to download music from the internet, and use it. You are obviously not allowed to upload music to the internet for publication-purposes, hence using a torrent-client for downloading puts you in a split situation.

Copy-ing of hardcopy books is also allowed for personal use, as far as I know.

Copy-ing of software is only allowed for backup-reasons. You are not allowed to use the copy if the original is not licensed to you. Downloading is not allowed.

Probably, the same is applicable for ebooks. If it's not licensed to you, you are not allowed to read it, hence it is very important how the license looks like. The prohibition of removing copy-protection applies to all examples, I think. I actually don't know about the legal status of downloading ebooks.

[pdurrant]

I've decided to follow up permitted use of ebooks with other retailers.

I've just sent an email to Barnes and Noble

Spoiler:

Dear Barnes & Noble,

I have a question about your terms & conditions for Nook Books.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/include/terms_of_use.asp

I note that part XII "Digital Content" grants me a license to "make personal, non-commercial use of the Digital Content" and that I may "transfer the Digital Content from [my] NOOK Library to no more than a total of six (6) other electronic devices that [I] own."

Does my personal use license extend to allowing anyone else to read the Digital Content on one of my electronic devices?

To be more specific, if I transfer one of my nook books to an electronic device within the limits specified above, may I allow any of the following to use the device to read my nook book?
* Spouse
* Child
* Close friend

Thank you.

Paul Durrant

Hmm... WH Smith use kobo, and I couldn't find an ebooks terms and conditions section at Waterstones. It's a bit hard to ask about T&Cs when you can't find them!

So: I've asked Amazon, Kobo and B&N. Anyone else I should ask?

[nogle]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I've decided to follow up permitted use of ebooks with other retailers.

I've just sent an email to Barnes and Noble

...

Hmm... WH Smith use kobo, and I couldn't find an ebooks terms and conditions section at Waterstones. It's a bit hard to ask about T&Cs when you can't find them!

So: I've asked Amazon, Kobo and B&N. Anyone else I should ask?

How about an Intellectual Property Lawyer. He/she could tell you how the case law has worked.