Arguments For And Against DRM

[disconnected]

I don't think that cons numbered one and three have been (or could be) quantified.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by leaston

I still haven't seen any definitive evidence to prove that piracy truly hurts sales.

I suggest reading this 2012 pdf: Assessing the Academic Literature Regarding the Impact of Media Piracy on Sales

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=2132153

Based on our review of the empirical literature we conclude that, while some papers in the literature find no evidence of harm, the vast majority of the literature (particularly the literature published in top peer reviewed journals) finds evidence that piracy harms media sales.

The eBook study I posted earlier isn't included in the above literature review, because it came out this year, so I will mention it again:

http://www.econ.umn.edu/~reime062/re...racy_paper.pdf

And here is a post-literature-review study on movies:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=2229349

You might make an argument that the cost of an anti-piracy measure exceeds the benefit. You might argue that some subgroup among books isn't hurt by piracy (if sales are currently zero, piracy won't hurt). But the evidence is that piracy, on average, hurts sales.

Is there something about indic language books that makes them a poorer -- or better -- candidate for DRM than those in English? That's should be the question for the OP poster, not some general argument that piracy is harmless.

[pdurrant]

Whether sending take-down notices to pirates sites is worthwhile is a different question as to whether adding encryption DRM is worthwhile.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

The first argument in favour of DRM you list is (to say the least) disputed. I don't think adding DRM (of the current encryption kind) to a book leads to any additional revenue.

Well, had I added DRM to my blogstore, at least one relative would not have been able to share a book that was requested by her friend and her friend would likely have bought it. This wasn't exactly a case of word of mouth that the relative spread--the friend follows me on facebook so knew about the book and the two of them got to talking...who initiated the "gift" or the idea isn't important, but this is not a case of the relative spreading the word. The book was known to both parties.

I think you can also add to the "Pros" - The ability to add DRM is definitely a pro if it makes the client feel better. Even if it ONLY makes the client/author "feel" better and stops nothing, it is still a "selling" point of DRM. In other words, locking my car may not actually keep a thief from stealing it, but I still lock my car and feel better about it. The neighbor had her purse locked in her car and for some crazy reason left it overnight in her driveway. The purse was stolen. But apparently she felt better about those locks.

When authors ask me about DRM, as a general rule, it's pretty obvious how educated the author is on the subject (the breaking of it, whether it matters to the end readers and so on). I springboard from there. For some I recommend it. They are simply not going to be happy without it and they are going to fret. For others, they want to be read, no matter who, how, etc. It's simply not an issue on their radar.

By and large I deal with a lot of readers who haven't any idea DRM exists. Many of the readers don't know how to mail a file to their kindle. They don't know the feature exists--they certainly aren't going to be getting a file from a friend and trying to side load it. TWICE this WEEK I was on the phone helping two different ladies add email mailing permission to their kindles. Neither had ever visited that part of the manage kindle page. BOTH wanted to review books. One needed to add netgalley and the other needed to add the author's email address. These are people who read a LOT and have used their kindles down to their touch pads. Neither knows or cares about DRM or whether a file could/should be shared. But DRM would stop either of these users from sharing a file/emailing it to someone who does know how to side load.

I honestly believe there are more people who DON'T know about DRM and sharing than there are who do. So as an author, I'm probably more protected by using DRM. That doesn't mean I do in all cases, but I personally believe it is a useful tool. Having DRM annoys a very small subset of readers and those who are annoyed by it usually know how to remove it.
I have no heartburn with someone removing it to make reading the books easier (or storing them) or for personal use. I do not approve of removing DRM so that the book can be given away, loaded to a pirate site, to spread the word, etc.

[JSWolf]

Here is the main reason against DRM. The people that are going to share your eBook on the net can remove the DRM no problem. The people that do not remove DRM are the ones you'll be inconveniencing. So why bother with DRM? All it does is add cost to your eBook. It does nothing to stop the eBooks from being shared over the net and it says that you think your paying customers are crooks before they even download your eBook.

I can strip the DRM in the time it takes to load the eBook into a Calibre library. So please trust your customers and don't add DRM. You don't need it, they don't need it and the ones you do need DRM for can remove it so it's a lose-lose situation.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

How does anybody copy your books in your files without your consent? Hacking into your hard drive, your cloud...? Or sharing computer?

Think of those celebrity photos that got out into the wild. Same thing could happen with your eBooks. If that happens, your watermarked eBook leads the authorities back to you and you get in trouble for something someone else did.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

The problem is that, I suspect, you have no data as to what the effect is on sales.

Yes, we do have data on the effect of DRM or not. Tor went DRM free and they have publicly said that the removal of DRM has had no effect on their sales.

That is hard data and very relevant.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

...it says that you think your paying customers are crooks before they even download your eBook.

No. I do not think my paying customers are crooks. I do not add DRM for them. I add it for the casual "Giving it to my friend."

Just because I lock my car does not mean I think my neighbors are crooks. I am not locking it because of them. Does it inconvenience my husband when he goes out there to grab a CD from the car? Well, if he didn't bring his keys, yes and even with his keys there is an extra step.

Yes, I understand that by adding DRM I am inconveniencing a few of my customers. To avoid that, I sell most of my books direct from my site. If they wish to avoid the removal step, they can buy the books there. I try to be a reasonable seller. I try to accommodate and still protect my livelihood. Do not take my protective steps personally. It is not about you. It's not an 'accusation.' It is utilizing tools that are available to me to make the best decisions possible.

[JSWolf]

Re: Watermarking....

Watermarking did not stop the Harry Potter eBooks from getting out in the wild. So that's a fail as well.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Re: Watermarking....

Watermarking did not stop the Harry Potter eBooks from getting out in the wild. So that's a fail as well.

If the watermarking is in the markup, it could be easily stripped basically the same way the HP books got out there: OCR. This is why companies are looking into the very dodgy practice of covertly individualising the actual text of the book as a crypto-watermark.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by leaston

Perhaps the onus should therefore be on the ebook reader manufacturers to ensure their devices are encrypted? Or provide us with locking briefcases with handcuffs to ensure we never lose an ebook. I really do think this argument is ludicrous.

I made this same observation a while ago in another DRM thread. If I'm responsible for what someone else did without my knowledge or approval, then the publisher/bookseller/author is responsible for what I did. Their loss, their fault.

And in any case, this idea that if I copied a file and gave it to Aunt Mary and she gave it to Cousin Pete, Cousin Pete would then gleefully post it on a file-sharing site for all their friends and relations and acquaintances, is rather far-fetched, I think. If someone did post it on a file-sharing site, fine, go after that individual when it happens. Aunt Mary and Cousin Pete just want to share the e-book the same way they've been accustomed to sharing physical books.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Aunt Mary and Cousin Pete just want to share the e-book the same way they've been accustomed to sharing physical books.

But they are committing piracy. This is a matter of educating the public: that creating a COPY of a book is not the same as LENDING a physical book, because you're creating extra copies. If you give a copy to Aunt Mary, and Aunt Mary gives a copy to Cousin Pete, THREE people now have the book, but only one copy has been bought. It's this type of "casual piracy" that's at the root of the problem, and it's this that DRM really does help to prevent.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But they are committing piracy. This is a matter of educating the public: that creating a COPY of a book is not the same as LENDING a physical book, because you're creating extra copies. If you give a copy to Aunt Mary, and Aunt Mary gives a copy to Cousin Pete, THREE people now have the book, but only one copy has been bought. It's this type of "casual piracy" that's at the root of the problem, and it's this that DRM really does help to prevent.

I let Aunt Mary borrow my spare ereader.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I let Aunt Mary borrow my spare ereader.

Still dubious, TM. Let's take it to extremes, and see how it looks: a school buys 50 readers, buys one copy of a book needed for a particular subject, strips the DRM, and loads it onto all 50 readers which it then lends out to all the pupils who are studying the subject. Fair use? I don't think so.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Still dubious, TM. Let's take it to extremes, and see how it looks: a school buys 50 readers, buys one copy of a book needed for a particular subject, strips the DRM, and loads it onto all 50 readers which it then lends out to all the pupils who are studying the subject. Fair use? I don't think so.

But Tubemonkey said he/she loaned the entire reader. From that I assumed that he had the copy of the book on that reader (not that he loaded it on twenty different readers). FWIW, Amazon already licenses one copy of a book to a "family of readers" so long as they are on the same account.

And I know you know all this. And the point remains that we have to try to be "fair." Writing and reading a book is a partnership/purchase between two parties. It's a constant dance trying to make the whole thing work. Not everyone is trying, of course, which is why DRM exists in the first place.