EU Court of Justice on DRM circumvention

[DiapDealer]

They weren't calling about books though, were they?

Hardcore re-readers (who don't already have control of their library) represent a tiny portion of the ebook reader market, I'll wager. Those that will pitch a fit about an ebook they can't re-read sometime down the road?... even tinier.

Could be wrong ... but I don't think I am.

DRM (other than for libraries/rentals) is wrong because DRM is wrong. That a handful of people who didn't know what was going on might get burnt in the future doesn't really add to that, IMO.

[rjcchan]

The argument would probably be something like:

The sole purpose of DRM removal tool A is to enable an individual to use a copyrighted work in a manner requiring authorization from the rights holder without obtaining that authorization. That is not an acceptable "substantial commercial purpose or use". The use/purpose itself must be legal.

In the Ntendo case(the one that started this thread), the challenged technology was defended because it enabled an Nintendo console to play mp3, games, movies etc which did not require further authority from the rights holder. The Court specifically emphasized that.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

They weren't calling about books though, were they?

Harcore re-readers (who don't already have control of their library) represent a tiny portion of the ebook reader market, I'll wager. Those that will pitch a fit about an ebook they can't re-read sometime down the road?... even tinier.

Could be wrong ... but I don't think I am.

DRM (other than for libraries/rentals) is wrong because DRM is wrong. That a handful of people who didn't know what was going on might get burnt in the future doesn't really add to that, IMO.

Probably the same amount of people who go ballistic if they have to buy a paper book again if it is lost, damaged, stolen etc.

In fact I think far more paper books have been lost, damaged or stolen than the number of ebooks that have become inaccessible in any given timeframe.

Helen

[hardcastle]

I'm seeing a lot of simple "the mass market does X" assumptions being thrown around this thread with little proof or justification. Can we at least use the music and gaming industries as a basis for our theories?

I would conclude that the longer the DRM sticks around in an industry, and the more failed DRM schemes are crafted, the larger the contingent of aware consumers will become. I would base this on PC games, where a large enough backlash against DRM around 2005-2008 allowed several stores to pop up and profit based almost exclusively on a DRM-free aspect.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

In fact I think far more paper books have been lost, damaged or stolen than the number of ebooks that have become inaccessible in any given timeframe.

Yes, but there's a big difference. If I lose access to paperbacks because they burned or flooded or stolen or something, then that's just bad luck. Shit happens.

If I'd lose access because the publisher used ink that mysteriously disappears 3 years after the book is bought (which is what DRM basically does if you can't open the book anymore), that would be another matter.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Probably the same amount of people who go ballistic if they have to buy a paper book again if it is lost, damaged, stolen etc.

In fact I think far more paper books have been lost, damaged or stolen than the number of ebooks that have become inaccessible in any given timeframe.

Helen

I think it comes down to why a paper book is no longer accessible. It almost always comes down to the owner being at fault. Even books whose pages yellow or fall out can still be read. However, if you weren't allowed to take your books with you when you moved residence, or had to destroy them when you didn't want to keep them anymore or died, then people would be upset over it, since these would be losses externally forced on people. Losing access to an ebook because of DRM is outrageous in the same way.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by rkomar

[...] or died

The lack of any mechanism to transfer rights to electronic media on death will become more of an issue as the years go by.

[jersysman]

@Hardcastle This topic has been discussed ad nauseum through the years here on Mobileread. If you do a search, I bet you could find reading that would last a few months. The same issues you raise have been highly debated here again and again and . . .

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

That ruling is common sense, but also exposes how unnecessary it is to prohibit breaking DRM separately from infringing copyright.

If you break DRM for a non-infringing use, so what? The creator isn't affected (beyond cases where they would like to sell multiple copies in different file formats) in that case. Where someone breaks DRM to infringe copyright, then they've infringed copyright, which already allows the affected copyrightholder legal remedies.

I thought this was common legal practice, in order to help assure there was a provable charge in case some loophole or technicality prevents the primary charge from sticking. Similar to "possession of burglars tools" etc.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Yes, but there's a big difference. If I lose access to paperbacks because they burned or flooded or stolen or something, then that's just bad luck. Shit happens.

If I'd lose access because the publisher used ink that mysteriously disappears 3 years after the book is bought (which is what DRM basically does if you can't open the book anymore), that would be another matter.

So do you seriously think this is likely to happen? That there will be no readers or apps available in the next 50 years that will open our currently purchased ebooks. I know it could happen, just like I know anything I own could be lost, stolen, confiscated etc. I have Romanian friends who lost everything they owned when the government changed. Bad stuff happens and while I am pretty complacent, I realize it could happen to me.

I might be annoyed if I could not read an ebook I had bought, but as long as my bank still allowed me to use my money (another of those abilities that could be removed and has been for many people), and my library card still worked I would not get all crazy about it. No matter whether I lose something due to my fault or someone else's, the loss is still of the same magnitude to me.

Of course I have relatively little invested in ebooks compared to the amount I have invested elsewhere. And it is certainly not likely that I will have the time to invest in ebooks as heavily as I have invested in paper books in the last 50+ years.

I just can't understand the outrage over something that may never happen expressed by a few. My condo gets broken into (not my fault in most instances) and someone steals my books or TV and my insurance does not cover it. Nasty of course, but how much time and energy should I put into obsessing about the possibility.

I guess I am just different in that few of my possessions are as easily replaceable as ebooks. Even groceries I would have to go to the store to replace. Hopefully my freezer doesn't blow up. I'd be really annoyed about that.

Sorry for ranting like a lunatic, but I buy a book or borrow a book from the library and read it or save it for my deathbed for absolutely no logical reason whatever. If they disappear I will simply rebuy or borrow or buy something else. I am not in love with DRM but no DRM could possibly limit my choices in ebooks. Worst case currently I would have to go back to paper.

Helen

[crossi]

That might be very well for you if you never reread or have few ebooks. I have about 900 ebooks probably average cost of $5 so that is about $4500. For me that's enough that I feel the need to take precautions just like I lock my car when I leave it. Not quite like replacing some groceries. Not taking precautions with that much money would just be stupid.

[hardcastle]

Originally Posted by jersysman

@Hardcastle This topic has been discussed ad nauseum through the years here on Mobileread. If you do a search, I bet you could find reading that would last a few months. The same issues you raise have been highly debated here again and again and . . .

That's no excuse for just blindly making market assumptions. At all.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

So do you seriously think this is likely to happen? That there will be no readers or apps available in the next 50 years that will open our currently purchased ebooks.

Unless you strip the DRM, absolutely. In 50 years time, you will not be able to open those files. And that'll probably be true in 20 years time too.

And since I have spent over $7000 on ebooks, that's not something I want to happen, which is why I strip the DRM from any DRMed ebook I buy, and why I won't buy DRM ebooks from which the DRM can't be stripped.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by crossi

That might be very well for you if you never reread or have few ebooks. I have about 900 ebooks probably average cost of $5 so that is about $4500. For me that's enough that I feel the need to take precautions just like I lock my car when I leave it. Not quite like replacing some groceries. Not taking precautions with that much money would just be stupid.

Nothing wrong with precautions. And I do possibly have less than 1,000 in actual cost of groceries. I have a small business selling these groceries as cooked gourmet meals which I spend/have spent many hours preparing. Perhaps again worth less than $4500, but possibly worth more in that I would not be able to meet my contracts. My insurance won't cover that. Still I would survive.

And 900 ebooks if you want to reread them all or even most is a significant loss. I doubt I bought more than 200 paper books a year but most did cost more than $5.00 without even counting inflation. possibly I have spent $100,000 on paper books in my lifetime if you include textbooks and manuals and hundreds of books given as gifts. They are gone now (don't know about the gifts), or I would be having to crawl over them to open a window I think.

Not saying that you shouldn't spend time worrying over your possible loss of ebooks if that is what you are happy doing, I just don't understand why it seems so important compared to other losses that can and do happen.

Helen

[hardcastle]

I may not have spent much money on eBooks, but they're important to me so I want them available as long as I can.

DRM limits that time in a very arbitrary way. It forces me to trust a company I have no power over and will inevitably die. I prefer to limit those situations, even in smaller, day-to-day tasks like eBook purchases.