Social DRM Take 2

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by nekokami

Well, but the thing is, Steve, many of us do feel that DRM is more of a hindrance to legitimate customers than it is to pirates, and that the hoped for advantages are grossly outweighed by the disadvantages.

I've never said that the present DRM systems are efficient or effective. At the same time, that doesn't mean a workable DRM system can't be devised, as other industries (example, cable TV) have already demonstrated. And on the subject, downloading a show from the web is not "defeating DRM," because the program is generally pulled from the internet after it has been aired on TV, when it is no longer considered exclusive content. If everyone was willing to wait for syndication to see a new show, we wouldn't even have cable TV.

Originally Posted by nekokami

I don't think if someone posts that they think DRM is disadvantageous, or even that they think that authors should be paid a flat rate per book rather than a royalty, that it is necessarily a personal attack on you.

Not necessarily, no. When stated in a sarcastic reply that is little more than "Oh yeah? Says you!" without making a constructive point...

Originally Posted by Lemurion

The only thing that really works is getting people to want to pay for things rather than pirate them; and the first step toward that is making them feel that the creator is not the enemy...

One of the basic fundamentals of human socialization is that it's okay to cheat the enemy. This is why it's so important to make people want to pay, because it will reduce (nothing can eliminate it) piracy and render DRM irrelevant.

It's a valid point. Unfortunately, we also have a situation where people believe that an electronic file downloaded from the internet should cost NO money... which means anyone who charges even a dime for a file becomes "the enemy."

This is why I contend that the status of electronic files needs to be established, i.e.: Are they "product," are they "data," are they "value-less copies," etc. We must establish that before we can establish whether or not they should have a "value," and therefore whether people should be willing to pay for them.

Answering that question may also lead us to other methods of establishing payment for electronic files besides consumer payments... methods that will render DRM systems moot.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Not necessarily, no. When stated in a sarcastic reply that is little more than "Oh yeah? Says you!" without making a constructive point...

The sarcasm was free, I don't see how you can construct it as a personal attack but whatever, the point was that DRM has been an abject failure, both in terms of technical execution and social acceptance.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Unfortunately, we also have a situation where people believe that an electronic file downloaded from the internet should cost NO money... which means anyone who charges even a dime for a file becomes "the enemy."

You are "the enemy" not because you want to be paid for your creation - you are "the enemy" because you still think DRM and "exclusive content/vendor lock-in" are a swell ideas. You are "the enemy" because you speak of piracy in dramatic, even hysterical terms when nobody cares about your precious creations. You are "the enemy" because you apparently think everybody is out to rip you off. You are the "enemy" because you insist on building a digital simulation of an early 20th-century copyright economy, based on scarcity and with distinct limits between broadcasting/transferring data and unit sales. You are "the enemy" because in the interest of making a buck, you would trigger an escalation of technology regulations running out of control and ruining civil liberties. But mostly, you are "the enemy" because that is the position you take.

There's your personal attack. If you are going to accuse me of attacking you, we might as well go there. The Genie is out of the bottle, Steve, and trying to sit on your content until people pay up is not going to work any longer. There is a lot of goodwill towards authors/content creators out there, instead of treating your customers as "the enemy" you should try to build on that. But whatever, you dismiss everyone who is critical of the failing status quo as an impractical dreamer, utopianist, or something like it. I doubt anything we say could ever penetrate that thick head of yours.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Fine, acid. And now that you are done attacking me, you can move on. If you have something constructive to discuss about DRM in this thread about DRM, please do so. If you have nothing more to add besides you're clear point that "DRM sucks," kindly move on so more thoughtful discussion can be continued.

I am not here to defend DRM. I am here to find ways in which e-books as an industry can grow and prosper for all parties involved. Some may not like it, but DRM is one of many tools that may or may not achieve that, and so they should be discussed... not dismissed simply because it's not the preferred method. If you know of a better method, by all means, start a thread and discuss it. (That is what we're here for... not attacking each other.)

I am not for "only me," as some people clearly think... I don't need to be, since I am not trying to make my living from e-books, despite the apparent belief that I fully intend to make enough money from the suckers of the planet to take over the world (insert maniacal laughter here). I happen to like reading e-books, too, and I'd like to see every book that comes out in print to also be available as an e-book.

That's all.

So... can we get back to the subject now? (Assuming we haven't already chased all the intelligent people out of this thread already.)

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I am not here to defend DRM. I am here to find ways in which e-books as an industry can grow and prosper for all parties involved. Some may not like it, but DRM is one of many tools that may or may not achieve that, and so they should be discussed... not dismissed simply because it's not the preferred method. If you know of a better method, by all means, start a thread and discuss it. (That is what we're here for... not attacking each other.)

The problem with defending DRM with analogies like cable signal is very simple - those analogies break down since for reading you just need a book and decent eyes, so why move to ebooks? When there is this resistance why add to it with DRM.

For me one of the big tests will come in a year, two when a large bunch of Kindles will break out of warranty - as all devices do, while I own print books published 50 years or more ago btw - and people will discover that to read the Kindle books purchased they have to shell out again $$$ - maybe 150, not 350 but still...

I bet that then you will see a nasty backlash and I hope it will extend only to DRM and not to ebooks in general...

[acidzebra]

Aaand Steve switches to "moral high ground" mode again, apparently forgetting his earlier ranting. You seem to do this a lot, but it doesn't look so good when we have the whole thread to look at. It is kind of hard to take the moral high ground when you are covered in mud.

But hey, fine, back to the subject at hand. Which is... DRM.

DRM is one of many tools that may or may not achieve that, and so they should be discussed... not dismissed simply because it's not the preferred method.

To which I replied, DRM has been an abject failure thus far. I'm not dismissing it out of hand, I'm pointing out it has been a disaster. And the thread is about an alternative suggestion, gently nagging the consumer/pirate. I don't know if it will work.

Assumptions:
1 honest consumers buy all their goods
2 pirates, um, pirate all their goods
3 there is some overlap and some edge cases, let's call them semi-honest.

I do not know in which quantities these groups exist - I think how you group them will have a massive impact on how you view the need for DRM or other restrictions. I'm operating under a 80/15/5 view, which may or may not have any traction with reality. Given that the major movie, music, and book industries have not gone bust, it is obvious not all consumers are pirates.

Now introduce restrictive DRM. Pirates will hardly be bothered at all - they will simply break through the restrictions. Honest customers will be bothered the most - they feel restricted, because they are. The edge cases and honest consumers may swing a little more towards piracy.

Now introduce this "social DRM" - which doesn't really fall under DRM, more like "nagware".
Honest consumers will not be affected. Neither will pirates. It might have some effect on the edge cases.
All in all, I do not see it will accomplish a lot.

[nekokami]

AZ, I think there's another group you've left out: "unwitting pirates." There are quite a few people who assume that if it's out there on the internet and can be downloaded for free, it must be ok. Kids, especially, fall into this category, especially when a search on a book or song title is likely to turn up torrents or youtube links for the first several hits. I don't know what percentage of people might fall into this category, but nagware might actually have an effect on them... if not immediately, at least further down the road, when they have more money.

I personally don't think DRM is effective in stopping any appreciable fraction of people who would otherwise illicitly copy content. Amazon/Mobi is a good example: when Mobipocket was simply one of several available formats, and very little content was only available in Mobipocket, there were few means of defeating the DRM. Within days of Amazon releasing exclusive content for the Kindle in Mobi format, a means to break the DRM was widely distributed. And the amount of resentment I've seen building toward Amazon for their exclusive Kindle content is huge-- at least among people who already knew about ebooks. I suppose Amazon can hope that they will be able to build a strong customer base almost entirely from people who were not ebook readers before. But that seems like a completely counter-productive strategy to me.

The practical function of DRM is negative at best. I think it is still being used because publishers and some authors cling to a mistaken belief that DRM can actually protect their content, at least somewhat. This is an emotional reason, not a rational one. Instead of looking at the actual consumer behavior and the way the world is changing, they want to believe that somehow DRM can keep things the way they were before digital distribution.

I believe the people who think a digital file should be free and has no value are in the minority. I certainly think a digital file has value. I have paid for many digital files in the past, and I expect to continue to do so. If I am wrong, and the majority of potential readers will simply not pay for content, DRM will not make them do so. (Neither will nagware.) In that case, advertising or patronage or some other system will be required to provide incentives to content creators so they can spend time focusing on their art and not flipping burgers or whatever.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

Assumptions:
1 honest consumers buy all their goods
2 pirates, um, pirate all their goods
3 there is some overlap and some edge cases, let's call them semi-honest.

Here I disagree somewhat - first of all this ideal notion of *honest consumer* does not exist. If there was such a *mythical beast* NYS for example would not need to pass the Amazon bill to force Amazon and others to collect - legally due - online taxes.

You may disagree philosophically with taxes, online taxes and what not, but if you take the view that the law is the law, so there is such a thing as *honest consumer* you have to deal with that - and for people in Europe and other places where they impose VAT on ebooks, I would urge them to think at how many time they did cash business to avoid VAT - from what I read in various studies lots of people do that at one time or another and statistics are statistics so to speak, so with all due respect and not intending offense, I do not believe saints congregate in one place online...

Second, a lot is a matter of price - where by that I mean both $ price, but ease of acquiring, utility, ease of use... And here drm for example adds to difficulty of use, sometimes dramatically so, sometimes less, but the big gripe for me is price.

After all even with my hate of (nonconvertible with ease) drm I bought recently 2 pdf drm e-books for 3-4$ since the print book is comparatively too expensive (at 15$ or more) and I am resigned with the idea that they will not be readable in a year, two, five if I am lucky - unless I take the 20-30 minutes to snag the pages from my screen in an image book to be ocr'ed... which I ain't going to bother for those books.

But those are special cases and if they were say 8 or 9$ each I would have balked and waited for the print to drop in price as used or simply read something else.

So the assumptions above are way too simplistic to discuss things based on them.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

If there was such a *mythical beast* NYS for example would not need to pass the Amazon bill to force Amazon and others to collect - legally due - online taxes.

You may disagree philosophically with taxes, online taxes and what not, but if you take the view that the law is the law, so there is such a thing as *honest consumer* you have to deal with that - and for people in Europe and other places where they impose VAT on ebooks, I would urge them to think at how many time they did cash business to avoid VAT

I'll confess, I have no idea what you are on about with the taxes. I live in the EU so am totally unfamiliar with your Amazon bill, and I pay with cash a lot. But when I buy something in a store with or without cash, there is still VAT on the items I buy - it is included in the price. Maybe I misunderstand.

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

So the assumptions above are way too simplistic to discuss things based on them.

Well, it is a model. A very simple model I agree, but it is not meant to be ultra-realistic. We have three, possibly four groups of people. People who pay (/are prepared to pay) for the majority of the media they consume, people who do not pay (/are not prepared to pay) for the majority of the media they consume, people who dip into both wells so to speak, and thanks to Neko, people who "know not what they do". We can look at technologies like DRM, and broadly estimate/make wild guesses about how it will impact each group and how something will/will not alter their behavior. If you have a better model, by all means.

Second, a lot is a matter of price - where by that I mean both $ price, but ease of acquiring, utility, ease of use... And here drm for example adds to difficulty of use, sometimes dramatically so, sometimes less, but the big gripe for me is price.

I agree fully there - this is why I argued earlier that treating the pirated books like a market separate from the ebook market and the pbook market makes sense - you can't compete on price there, as pirated works are typically available for free. There are a lot of other ways to compete, but trying to lock down your content and make it inconvenient for people is probably a Very Bad Idea.

[nekokami]

Pirated books are not really free when you consider the difficulty in finding a good copy of the book you are looking for. For most people, their time is also worth something, so the convenience of a good, easy to use online store that has clean, nicely formatted ebooks would be worth some amount of money. I think the Baen store shows this.

And while I also doubt saints are congregating here or anywhere else online, I still think most people are willing to pay for most of what they use. In other words, I think the overlap group is larger than 5%, but the vast majority of people will pay a reasonable sum for a digital product that is easy to purchase, easy to use, and has a value to them (i.e. they want to read, watch, listen to, etc. the content).

[Taylor514ce]

Many torrents include the content and URL files to link back to the "pirate's" site. Why go to the site? To get more content. While you're there, the site has ads. That is how the "pirate economy" works in many cases.

This site has ads... most forums do, it's how they make money. Some are very profitable indeed. Why not embrace this "pirate economy"? Authors could create their own sites, or band together. I think the TOR site is a major missed opportunity. I think they have a great collection of authors, editors and fans there. The blog format is awful, they need a real forum, and they could charge a subscription or use advertising. Give the books away, release them into the wild. Revenue comes not from the books but from the site.

The site owner (publisher?) pays the authors to participate on the site and produce content. Readers who become fans become site members/visitors, and the site itself generates the revenue.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by acidzebra

I agree fully there - this is why I argued earlier that treating the pirated books like a market separate from the ebook market and the pbook market makes sense - you can't compete on price there, as pirated works are typically available for free. There are a lot of other ways to compete, but trying to lock down your content and make it inconvenient for people is probably a Very Bad Idea.

Agreed hundred percent about DRM, no question about it.

But to me any realistic model/discussion has to include some kind of price level of ebooks and the utility of buying them. There are many reasons you would like to buy an ebook even if you could find it for free - for example if you perceive the author/publisher as your friend, if you are part of a community - like Baen for example so successfully does. Make a community, be nice to your fans/customers rather than shouting at them and you may see some changes...And let us be realistic, for most authors we are not talking about millions of people, but thousands or tens of thousands if they are lucky...

Even though the long-awaited Storm of the Shadows by D. Weber (HH #14) got released as a whoopsie draft by mistake by Mr. Weber, most people who got that will pay the 15$ for the legitimate e-arc and some will buy the hc next year too

I am willing to support authors - but insults, taking the high-moral ground and such just put me off - most authors who do well are just matter of fact about piracy - see Scalzi, Stross and others - and I have not seen them shouting from the rooftops about the *evil pirates*.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by nekokami

And while I also doubt saints are congregating here or anywhere else online, I still think most people are willing to pay for most of what they use.

I think this is important that people would like to pay for what they use and having a ebook without reading it I do not consider to be use. I still think that some system were you pay after you have read a book and you pay towards the next book could work. And the initial payment to writers could be through gatekeepers such as reviewers. You pay reviewers and the pay part of this to writers.

The reason you need the copy before you use it is that it might not be possible to buy the book if you want to read it in a couple of years.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by tompe

I think this is important that people would like to pay for what they use and having a ebook without reading it I do not consider to be use. I still think that some system were you pay after you have read a book and you pay towards the next book could work.

Why go to these lengths rather than posting copious excerpts, and asking for payment for the whole book if you wish to read it after all?

Baen posts 25% free from pretty much anything they do, and for popular novels they go to 75-80% if you are willing to follow snippets.

I remember when I was following Eric Flint Ring of Fire 2 - it had a bunch of short stories and the piece of resistance was Mr. Flint's novella at the end. In the free part quite a few of the ss were posted, while Mr. Flint snippeted all but the last several pages of his novella so when I got the full copy, I was kind of "is this all that's new?"

I still did not regret paying 6$ and I would have been willing to pay 15$ for an e-arc for that matter - it was not offered for some reason, forgot why -

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

Why go to these lengths rather than posting copious excerpts, and asking for payment for the whole book if you wish to read it after all?

Well, I want to be able to read a book in one sitting so that would not work. And I also think that what you thought of the book should influence how much you pay.

The whole idea is to pay for the next book the author is writing so you then totally side step the problem of copying.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by tompe

Well, I want to be able to read a book in one sitting so that would not work. And I also think that what you thought of the book should influence how much you pay.

The whole idea is to pay for the next book the author is writing so you then totally side step the problem of copying.

As much as I think people mean to be honest, I suspect people would be a lot more likely to forget to pay if they didn't have to do so until the end of the book. And while there could be a link to "tip" the author more if you like the book, to be honest I don't think it's reasonable to expect to read the whole book and then decide if you want to pay for it or not.

We know that a number of libraries are now offering ebooks for loan. These books are, of course, locked down with DRM, and they expire after the end of the loan time. However, they present an alternative way to pay for books -- the library is funded by local taxes and/or subscription fees, and pays the publisher for the right to loan the books, and the publisher pays the authors. It is not the system I would prefer to use-- I'd rather just buy my books without DRM and be able to keep them. But it would be a reasonable alternative for those who don't re-read, or don't want to pay a fixed fee per book.