Arguments For And Against DRM

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Converting from Kindle to ePub, ePub to Kindle, etc.

Yes. Ie changing the actual file. Changing the display setting in your reading app certainly isn't reformatting.

[JSWolf]

@HarryT, why is it you can talk about loaning a book on a Reader being against terms and conditions yet you say go ahead and convert an Amazon eBook when that is against Amazon's terms and conditions?

[HarryT]

I am against piracy, Jon. "Lending" a book to all your mates is piracy. Format conversion hurts nobody.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am against piracy, Jon. "Lending" a book to all your mates is piracy. Format conversion hurts nobody.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

I presume (hope) you are talking about "lending" in terms giving your friends a copy while keeping an accessible copy for yourself?
Hopefully you have no issue with lending through approved mechanisms, or lending by actually loaning your device to someone?

On a related note, just out of curiosity, what would you think about someone stripping DRM from one of their ebooks, loaning a copy to a friend, NOT retaining any copy for themselves, getting a promise from the friend to delete their copy when they are done reading, and only obtaining a new accessible copy for themselves after the friend reports they have done as promised?

ApK

[shalym]

Originally Posted by ApK

I presume (hope) you are talking about "lending" in terms giving your friends a copy while keeping an accessible copy for yourself?
Hopefully you have no issue with lending through approved mechanisms, or lending by actually loaning your device to someone?

On a related note, just out of curiosity, what would you think about someone stripping DRM from one of their ebooks, loaning a copy to a friend, NOT retaining any copy for themselves, getting a promise from the friend to delete their copy when they are done reading, and only obtaining a new accessible copy for themselves after the friend reports they have done as promised?

ApK

Harry has stated in the past that he doesn't believe that anyone would ever actually do that...he has trust issues.

Shari

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

I presume (hope) you are talking about "lending" in terms giving your friends a copy while keeping an accessible copy for yourself?
Hopefully you have no issue with lending through approved mechanisms,

None whatsoever.

or lending by actually loaning your device to someone?

Nothing against it personally, but it MAY be against the T&C of the bookstore IF they sell you the book licence for your personal use only.

On a related note, just out of curiosity, what would you think about someone stripping DRM from one of their ebooks, loaning a copy to a friend, NOT retaining any copy for themselves, getting a promise from the friend to delete their copy when they are done reading, and only obtaining a new accessible copy for themselves after the friend reports they have done as promised?

Call me cynical, but I would never trust someone to do that, simply because I don't think I'd do it myself. The temptation to keep it would be too great.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am against piracy, Jon. "Lending" a book to all your mates is piracy. Format conversion hurts nobody.

That's a subjective opinion. You're allowing your passion to blind you to the fact that "harm/hurt" is not something you're the definitive authority on. That you believe one is harmful where another is not, is not proof that it's so. You have every right to place the almighty "copyright" above any other rule/regulation/law, but that doesn't mean everyone must share that opinion. Breaking the rules is breaking the rules. You shouldn't vilify breaking one, but rationalize (and possibly even encourage) breaking another just because you don't see the harm in it.

If you feel you should be free to pick and choose which rules you're going to abide by and which ones you're going to break, don't you think others deserve that same latitude?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's a subjective opinion. You're allowing your passion to blind you to the fact that "harm/hurt" is not something you're the definitive authority on. That you believe one is harmful where another is not, is not proof that it's so. You have every right to place the almighty "copyright" above any other rule/regulation/law, but that doesn't mean everyone must share that opinion. Breaking the rules is breaking the rules. You shouldn't vilify breaking one, but rationalize (and possibly even encourage) breaking another just because you don't see the harm in it.

If you feel you should be free to pick and choose which rules you're going to abide by and which ones you're going to break, don't you think others deserve that same latitude?

I don't believe I've ever claimed to be the "definitive authority" on it, DD. You know why I'm so vehemently against copyright infringement: because it hurts me personally. I will continue to "campaign" against it, for that reason. Of course you're free to hold a different opinion, but I'm going to continue to say that I strongly disagree with you!

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You know why I'm so vehemently against copyright infringement: because it hurts me personally. I will continue to "campaign" against it, for that reason. Of course you're free to hold a different opinion, but I'm going to continue to say that I strongly disagree with you!

I'm fine with open, public disagreements.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am against piracy, Jon. "Lending" a book to all your mates is piracy. Format conversion hurts nobody.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

But it is not piracy since it is allowed according to Amazon's TOS.

And format conversion of course hurts publishers since you will not buy the book in different formats.

So is the problem that somebody is hurt or is the problem that things are against rules or laws?

Is copyright infringement when nobody gets hurt then OK?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by tompe

But it is not piracy since it is allowed according to Amazon's TOS.

No, see post #261 above for clarification.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am against piracy, Jon. "Lending" a book to all your mates is piracy. Format conversion hurts nobody.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

Format conversion is the gateway to piracy.

Didn't you claim that an individual is responsible for safeguarding a file? If you strip the DRM, and someone else manages to get ahold of it and upload it to a file-sharing site, doesn't that make you guilty of copyright infringement and piracy?

Fine with me if you want to cherry-pick which parts of the TOS and copyright to obey and which to ignore, but others may draw distinctions differently and think it's just fine to copy a de-DRMed file to loan to a friend.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Format conversion is the gateway to piracy.

Didn't you claim that an individual is responsible for safeguarding a file? If you strip the DRM, and someone else manages to get ahold of it and upload it to a file-sharing site, doesn't that make you guilty of copyright infringement and piracy?

Apply a "reasonable person" standard. If the stripper left the stripped file lying around on a public server? Yeah, maybe he's responsible. If it was on their personal machine at home and someone took it without permission? Well, then you might as well claim the author of the book is guilty of piracy because it couldn't have happened if he didn't write it in the first place.

Fine with me if you want to cherry-pick which parts of the TOS and copyright to obey and which to ignore, but others may draw distinctions differently and think it's just fine to copy a de-DRMed file to loan to a friend.

I can make what I think is pretty darn effective fair use case for personal format shifting. Not so much for giving out duplicates.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by ApK

I can make what I think is pretty darn effective fair use case for personal format shifting.

That means nothing when the terms specifically prohibit such an action.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

That means nothing when the terms specifically prohibit such an action.

Terms can be incorrectly written, illegal, and otherwise invalid for various reasons.

General releases and the like are often thrown out in courts.

So it could mean everything.