Arguments For And Against DRM

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Let's be fair -- this isn't really about fairness. DRM does absolutely nothing to prevent this, as the book can just as easily be loaded on(to all 50 ereaders) with the DRM intact.

This is incorrect. Amazon's DRM restricts the number of devices the book can simultaneously be loaded onto (typically to 6 devices). ADE achieves the same result by limiting (again to 6) the number of readers that can be registered against the same ADE account.

[meeera]

I don't think anyone's yet raised in this discussion one of the other DRM issues: that Adobe DRM is not just locking the file, it's ensuring that Adobe can spy on readers and phone home, in a massive overreach from their stated privacy policy. Maybe only a minority of readers cares about this, but for those for whom it's an issue, it can be a dealbreaker.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by meeera

I don't think anyone's yet raised in this discussion one of the other DRM issues: that Adobe DRM is not just locking the file, it's ensuring that Adobe can spy on readers and phone home, in a massive overreach from their stated privacy policy. Maybe only a minority of readers cares about this, but for those for whom it's an issue, it can be a dealbreaker.

That's a "feature" of one particular version of ADE, not Adobe DRM per se. You don't have to use that version of ADE.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's a "feature" of one particular version of ADE, not Adobe DRM per se. You don't have to use that version of ADE.

Yes, being somewhat informed, I've deliberately stuck with a 1.* version of ADE at the moment - but I don't know how long it will be before that stops working. Adobe may have backed down for now on their plan for big changes - weren't they initially slated for implementation around the middle of this year? (from memory) - but I doubt that will last forever.

And in the more general and looking-to-the-future sense, the average reader has no easy way of knowing whether a locked book may be opening the door for spyware. Some people find that pretty creepy. Obviously, the publisher might decide that this is not enough to influence their decision on digital locks; but it's another point to be raised in the pro/con discussion.

[leaston]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

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

Thank you for posting the links to the reports.

The problem I have is that cherry picking the research to support an argument isn't really proof of anything. The conclusions in the first study mentioned are based on statistics.

I'm not necessarily disputing what was concluded, but at the same time, remain healthily skeptical. They acknowledge there are other studies which disagree with their findings and so these reports aren't really representitive of the whole picture.

The second study also acknowledges serious limitations in their findings with comparisons of newer works not being carried out and the issues with comparing sales of popular, established authors and newer authors, promotional measures etc. Again, it may be indicative of sales being hurt in certain circumstances, but hardly definitive proof of anything across the board.

The last study relating to movies talks about the closure of Megaupload and its impact on three movie studios. This one distribution network closure is the tip of the iceberg and again, merely takes a snapshot, a tiny sampling of a huge network being used to distribute copyrighted works. This isn't the same market as books anyway and so I'm not sure how it applies to this thread. Nor does it prove that pircacy hurts sales - there could be other factors not included in this study that actually show that piracy can support or increase sales as is the case with some ebook piracy (see study 2 above; "Some less well-known artists may welcome this online piracy as an opportunity to increase reach").

Sorry, I'm still not convinced.

[leaston]

All these complaints about it being wrong/immoral/illegal or whatever when lending ebooks to others has me wondering...What's the ruling on me lending myself copies? For example, I buy a book online and want the option of reading it on my tablet, phone and ebook readers (Kobo and Kindle). That potentially means I need 4 copies of said book. Irrespective of whether it's got a watermark or DRM, am I breaking copyright by putting it (via whatever means) onto each device, despite only having bought/rented/leased one copy?

Also, what about my aunt, mum, friend who visits my home, who may pick up my ebook reader and read one of the books I have installed? Am I at fault for leaving the ereader in the open for anyone to peruse? Are they stealing the book because they haven't bought it?

The mind really does boggle!

Should I therefore be emailing the publisher to inform them of my misdeeds? To me, the argument has almost become this farcical at times in this thread.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by leaston

All these complaints about it being wrong/immoral/illegal or whatever when lending ebooks to others has me wondering...What's the ruling on me lending myself copies? For example, I buy a book online and want the option of reading it on my tablet, phone and ebook readers (Kobo and Kindle). That potentially means I need 4 copies of said book. Irrespective of whether it's got a watermark or DRM, am I breaking copyright by putting it (via whatever means) onto each device, despite only having bought/rented/leased one copy?

No, you aren't. You can create as many copies as you wish for personal use - that is implicit in the sale.

Also, what about my aunt, mum, friend who visits my home, who may pick up my ebook reader and read one of the books I have installed? Am I at fault for leaving the ereader in the open for anyone to peruse? Are they stealing the book because they haven't bought it?

They aren't "stealing the book", but if, for example, your contract with the bookstore says (as most of them do) that the content is licensed for your personal use only, then your aunt, mum, or friend, are not licensed to read the book. But I very, very seriously doubt that anyone is going to either know or care!

[shalym]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, you aren't. You can create as many copies as you wish for personal use - that is implicit in the sale.

I'm pretty sure that's not true in the US.

They aren't "stealing the book", but if, for example, your contract with the bookstore says (as most of them do) that the content is licensed for your personal use only, then your aunt, mum, or friend, are not licensed to read the book. But I very, very seriously doubt that anyone is going to either know or care!

Amazon has explicitly advertised (not just implied) that they intend for the content sold by them to be shared among family members--Kindle Free time couldn't exist otherwise. Since they themselves are encouraging people to act in a way that breaks the contract, wouldn't the contract be null and void? I'm pretty sure that if a person were ever to have their account closed and their content locked for breaking Amazon's TOS they could successfully sue based on the fact that all of Amazon's advertising encourages sharing of content within a Kindle account, no matter what the TOS says.

Shari

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by meeera

I don't think anyone's yet raised in this discussion one of the other DRM issues: that Adobe DRM is not just locking the file, it's ensuring that Adobe can spy on readers and phone home, in a massive overreach from their stated privacy policy. Maybe only a minority of readers cares about this, but for those for whom it's an issue, it can be a dealbreaker.

But only if you use ADE 4. I'm using ADE 2 and I have the outgoing DNS/IP blocked so even if ADE 2 was to try to phone home, it would fail.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by meeera

And in the more general and looking-to-the-future sense, the average reader has no easy way of knowing whether a locked book may be opening the door for spyware. Some people find that pretty creepy. Obviously, the publisher might decide that this is not enough to influence their decision on digital locks; but it's another point to be raised in the pro/con discussion.

I'm sorry, but that's just going off the mark. That's just way too much paranoia there.

[JSWolf]

According to Amazon's terms and conditions, it's against the T&C to format shift an Amazon eBook. Have we all done it? Most of us have. So we've broken the T&C Amazon has laid down. Will we stop doing this? Nope.

[meeera]

Historically, most times we think we're being paranoid about digital privacy, we find out that our paranoia didn't stretch far enough. If you don't care about digital privacy, bully for you. It doesn't make other people "paranoid".

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by meeera

Historically, most times we think we're being paranoid about digital piracy, we find out that our paranoia didn't stretch far enough. If you don't care about digital piracy, bully for you. It doesn't make other people "paranoid".

But in this case, I see no reason to be paranoid about downloading a legally purchased DRMed eBook. I've not once heard of anyone getting a trojan or a virus because of this.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But in this case, I see no reason to be paranoid about downloading a legally purchased DRMed eBook. I've not once heard of anyone getting a trojan or a virus because of this.

I'm not talking about trojans or viruses, I'm talking about Adobe itself spying on users, and what's even worse sending all the info in clear text.

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by mandy314

[...] others mere consumer/readers sharing their views/opinions and information.

It all started with the removal of DRM.

Not so in general.

There are books on pirate sites which were produced by scanning a printed copy - this is most obvious when the book was never issued as an e-book, DRM or otherwise.

The scanning route automatically gives a cap on the resources worth spending on smarter DRM.