My perspective on buying books with DRM

[darryl]

I have made the point many times now and expect I will make it many more. The reality of the market at the moment is that obtaining virtually any ebook without cost is a trivial task for anyone who wants to go to a little bit of trouble. The continued existence of a thriving market for books is a testament both to people's honesty and their apathy. Apathy in that purchasing books (and for that matter movies and music) has been made so easy and convenient and affordable by legal means most people could simply not be bothered. Honesty in that most people clearly seem to want to see the author rewarded. There are enough apathetic and honest people around to allow for a thriving market.

But this is not a market that should be taken for granted or exploited. It may not be quite as convenient to obtain a pirate copy of a book, but not prohibitively so. If the market is not treated with respect more people can and will resort to pirate copies. What seems clear is that if the product is reasonably priced, easy and convenient to purchase and a good user experience and customer service is delivered, there are more than enough paying customers to sustain the market. The very nature of the product makes some piracy inevitable. Large scale piracy, whilst it would not end the writing of books, would likely result in a very different and inferior "market" for books. But, in the current market, some level of piracy is arguably good, as it may be one of the few controls on the large publishing oligopoly's attempts to push prices higher by eliminating retail competition. Customers asked to pay $16.95 for that newly released novel have many choices, and no doubt some do opt to download it for nothing, where perhaps they would have been prepared to pay, say, $9.99 or some more reasonable price for it. Publishers must take this, the true reality of the market, into account when setting their prices. I doubt there are very many people who absolutely refuse to pay anything for a book, though there are some. But I think there are more substantial numbers who will pay for more reasonably priced books but obtain pirate copies of the higher priced ones. Add to this those who would buy now at a reasonable price but wait to borrow the higher priced books from the library, or even wait for prices to come down before buying.

I truly don't believe that piracy is currently a terrible problem for the industry. It is an industry where the nature of the product makes some piracy inevitable. Reasonable prices, convenience and respect do far more to keep the market healthy than all the bleating about piracy ruining the industry and the exaggerated claims about the losses and damage it allegedly causes.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by shalym

Huh?? I'm confused. Are you saying that people who disagree with you about this are at right angles to you? Or are they statistically independent from you? Or maybe at right angles to the world, or maybe statistically independent from the world?

Maybe you're using a different definition than I am?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/orthogonal

Shari

Nope, just the people who are trying to bring comparisons that are at right angles to the case.

Originally Posted by murg

Clearly, you haven't seen any episodes of CSI Cyber.

I am more than happy to confess to that failure.

Originally Posted by jbjb

Firstly, it doesn't take much in the way of expertise to remotely access the files of most consumers - there are easily downloadable kits that the relatively unskilled can use to do just that.

Secondly, even if copying your ebook library may not be such an intruder's *primary* concern, that doesn't mean they won't do it anyway while they've got access to your files.

As I asked before - do you really think that criminal negligence and deliberate action are the only two possibilities for someone's ebooks "getting out there"?

/JB

You have still not convinced me of a viable alternative -- what-ifs don't count.

Anyone who gets access to your computer can find far more interesting things to be concerned about, and I really am convinced that deliberate action will be almost always the reason. Criminal negligence for the South Africans among us, as an also-noticeable factor.

Peoples' identities are stolen and used to commit crimes, on occasion. The victims are investigated to the full extent of whatever-the-crime-is-worth, regardless of the what-if potential that turns out to be that particular case.
Same here -- if your ebooks against all the odds end up stolen and uploaded to the darknet, I expect, nay, demand, that the individual in question be treated the same as any actual uploader of pirated ebooks. Being suspected of a crime does happen to innocent people all the time, and for this reason, a curious institution has arisen whereby we investigate and bring to trial. IOW, there are methods to deal with the possibility that our initial suspicions are wrong.

Your what-if is not sufficient to enable a suspect in a crime to get off scot-free with zero scrutiny.



I am NOT suggesting we automatically send a person to jail without a trial if their ebooks end up on the darknet.
I am suggesting that due process of the law applies.

[PandathePanda]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Nope, just the people who are trying to bring comparisons that are at right angles to the case.

no it isn't

To explain my point:

1. If my (computer) gets stolen, and the crime is committed (Piracy) I'm Criminally negligent. (your point)

2. If my (car) gets stolen, and the crime is committed (murder) I'm not Criminally negligent. (your point)

so my point isn't at right angles since I was using your point, I just changed the "crime". You can't say point 1 is valid yet point 2 not, since they are the same principle (and if one use it in court it could be a point to have the case dismissed?)

[darryl]

The situation is really not that complex. The law deals with this issue all of the time. If the source of a pirate ebook or ebooks is traced back to you, you will likely have some explaining to do. This does not mean that you are guilty of a crime or a civil wrong, but does mean that you are suspected of one or the other or both. If you cannot provide a reasonable explanation then you should expect that the matter will be taken further. If you do provide an explanation, it will usually be tested. You should expect that your computer will be seized and forensically examined. This is not always a bad thing. Anecdotally, there is a case of a man accused of child pornography offences who was cleared when maiware was found on his computer during such an examination.

But, at the end of the day, innocent until proven guilty goes only so far.

[barryem]

Originally Posted by darryl

It may not be quite as convenient to obtain a pirate copy of a book, but not prohibitively so.

I buy the books I read from Amazon but sometimes I want to read a book they don't have. I'm pretty much forced to read on a Kindle where I can keep the text size where I need it, my eyes being old, so I'll get those books any way I can.

Another situation where I'll use a pirated ebook is when the one I bought from Amazon has enough typos and formatting errors to be distracting and then I'll find one from another source to actually read. In this case I've paid for the book so I don't feel at all bad about that.

The point of all this, though, is that the ease of locating and obtaining pirate books is every bit as easy as getting them from Amazon and the quality is usually better. I simply go to usenet, do a search for the book I want, usually by title, sometimes by author, and there are many on my screen to choose from. I click and it downloads. That's all there is to it. It's typically less than a minute from the time I decide I want it to the time I have it on my computer.

Yes this did require a bit of planning to set it up but even that only took a few minutes of googling and setup time.

And yet I buy most of the books I read. It's not because I'm so honest. I'm reasonably honest but I'm fine with a bit of larceny. That's the American way. The thing is, though, I love to read and I'm grateful to authors for providing me good stuff to read and I like to pay them back so they'll keep on doing it.

Barry

[eschwartz]

This is the first I've heard of "fine with a bit of larceny" being "the american way"...

Aside: usenet??? You know all the cool people use torrents these days...

[murg]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

This is the first I've heard of "fine with a bit of larceny" being "the american way"...

What rock have you been hiding under?

[eschwartz]

I am aware that many people do it. I was unaware that it had become a societal ideal.

[murg]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

I am aware that many people do it. I was unaware that it had become a societal ideal.

America was founded on a bit of larceny...

[barryem]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

I am aware that many people do it. I was unaware that it had become a societal ideal.

Of course it's not a societal ideal. Ideals are about how we should behave. Larceny is one of the ways we actually do behave, ignoring the ideals.

I'm not sure the people of the USA are really more larcenous than other people. I spent most of my adult life in a very culturally diverse area in Houston and had friends from a lot of countries and cultures and I found them to be about as honest and as dishonest as we locals. But I do think we are a bit more open about it.

Barry

[eschwartz]

Yeah, sure, whatever you say. Take your openness somewhere else and stop advocating piracy on MobileRead.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Yeah, sure, whatever you say. Take your openness somewhere else and stop advocating piracy on MobileRead.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I have not interpreted barryem's posts as advocating piracy. I think he has been open, probably too open, about what he himself does, but I did not take him as either suggesting others do it or even suggesting that it is right. He is simply pointing out the reality. I don't think Americans are any different to other nationalities in this regard. Despite the efforts by various groups representing rights holders, I also suspect that most people still do not regard copyright infringement as equivalent to larceny. And technically they are correct, at least historically, since an essential element of common law larceny was the intent to deprive the owner permanently of the goods concerned, as well as carry them away.

[eschwartz]

He has repeatedly implied that it isn't a bad thing, I think that qualifies.

And I don't buy the "copyright infringement isn't stealing" argument, and I don't buy your technicality either.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

He has repeatedly implied that it isn't a bad thing, I think that qualifies.

And I don't buy the "copyright infringement isn't stealing" argument, and I don't buy your technicality either.

Yes. I am being a touch technical. Please forgive this, it is a feature of my profession and I am too old now to easily change. But copyright infringement is not larceny. They are not identical, factually or legally.

I am not suggesting that infringing copyright is morally or legally correct or acceptable. It is even arguable that theft and copyright infringement are moral equivalents. It seems that this may in fact be your thinking on the matter. However, the fact that copyright owners want to send a simple message with maximum impact does not magically turn one into the other.

[eschwartz]

True, I suppose.

I for one believe that physical theft and copyright infringement are both instances of "depriving another of their rightful property", i.e. the money they should be paid in this case, which is I believe the underlying reason behind historical larceny laws...
But I suppose many people don't really get that because they are too busy paying attention to the technicalities. Probably why I reacted such to what you said.