ePub gets (yet) another DRM system

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by EndStop

How good is your social status/self esteem if you can read the book but not get involved with the whole experience?

Exactly the same as before. I don't use social media, except when absolutely necessary (which amounts to a few times a year). I couldn't care less about any kind of interactive content.

Originally Posted by EndStop

Still, the next kindle might only display Ebooks after the licence if confirmed via internet connection. Alternatively it can search a download for key passages of copyrighted text. How would you feel if you read half the book then your Kindle demanded cash to finish it? Lots of cash as a fine? Blacklists itself from the net for piracy?

What about legally purchased and sideloaded books? Purchased elsewhere, I mean.

[jhowell]

Originally Posted by EndStop

I am talking about firmware in the kindle that will detect copyright material and react. You could load a pirated copy but it will just do a text compare with samples from a large selection of Amazon's better sellers. The processing power and storage involved is feasible.

It is extremely unlikely that Amazon (or any other major e-book retailer) would implement such a check.

Amazon allows you to read books that you purchased elsewhere using their apps and devices. That feature encourages customers of B&N and Kobo to switch to Amazon, knowing that they can retain access to their existing purchases if they care about that.

They then encourage future purchases to be made at the Amazon store in several ways. Books from elsewhere are segregated as "documents" instead of books and attempting to defeat that results in lack of synchronization of that book with your account. Several features of the reading apps/devices are only available for books in KFX format and Amazon has tried to keep users from converting their non-Amazon purchased books to that format.

What they are instead doing is making it more difficult to take purchased books out of their Kindle ecosystem. Most books are now delivered in KFX format, which is far harder to convert to EPUB than their previous formats. In addition they are in the process of rolling out a new DRM scheme for that format, probably in reaction to support for KFX being added to the DeDRM tools earlier this year.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by EndStop

Besides while being held to ransom for the next book is fair, if the book ends before some sort of conclusion it's going to be hard to get a good review.

You must be seeing different books/reviews than I am. People gobble up books that end before any sort of conclusion and rave about them all the time. Have for years. I (and apparently you, as well) are in the minority on that issue. Many series authors only ever have to worry about writing one ending--in the last book of the series.

It's all moot anyway. As other have already noted, there's no advantage to be gained in Amazon stopping users from side-loading their own books. They'd have to be forced to make such a decision. Who's going to force Amazon to do something like that?

Amazon's concern is with making it as easy as possible for people to buy their content and read it on any device they choose to read it on. They've no interest in limiting how people read the content they purchase from them.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by EndStop

I am talking about firmware in the kindle that will detect copyright material and react. You could load a pirated copy but it will just do a text compare with samples from a large selection of Amazon's better sellers. The processing power and storage involved is feasible.

The sting would be to not simply deny access to a pirated book but to do it in the most irritating way possible. I have heard of ideas for slowly removing features from pirated games on the same principle.

How has a discussion about a new ePub DRM system become turned to how big bad Amazon is going to screw people over?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

How has a discussion about a new ePub DRM system become turned to how big bad Amazon is going to screw people over?

Because everything always ends with big bad Amazon ruining everything for everyone.

[EndStop]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It's all moot anyway. As other have already noted, there's no advantage to be gained in Amazon stopping users from side-loading their own books. They'd have to be forced to make such a decision. Who's going to force Amazon to do something like that?

Actually Amazon need not be involved at all. It only requires Kindle to take action and a deal between the publishers and kindle to offer lower prices through, perhaps, Amazon to kindle customers in return for protection - well that is more than possible.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

How has a discussion about a new ePub DRM system become turned to how big bad Amazon is going to screw people over?

Because that's about the only way it can happen. Simple DRM doesn't work and won't work. To work requires control of any device the user cares to use as a reader.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by EndStop

Actually Amazon need not be involved at all. It only requires Kindle to take action and a deal between the publishers and kindle to offer lower prices through, perhaps, Amazon to kindle customers in return for protection - well that is more than possible.

What does that even mean?

Kindle IS Amazon. Kindle customers ARE Amazon customers. Of course they'd (Amazon) have to be involved in any kind deal with publishers. Are you under the impression that Kindle is an entity separate from Amazon? Kindle is an Amazon product/platform. Kindle isn't a standalone business entity of any kind.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by EndStop

The sting would be to not simply deny access to a pirated book but to do it in the most irritating way possible. I have heard of ideas for slowly removing features from pirated games on the same principle.

Given that I purchase books from several retailers, I can see having my ebook downloaded from GooglePlay, converted to azw3 and sideloaded onto a Kindle being marked as pirated since it was not purchased from Amazon.

Slightly different from games, many of which now require connecting to a server to enjoy the game. FIFA without multiplayer? Cold pancakes and no honey.

Originally Posted by EndStop

Actually Amazon need not be involved at all. It only requires Kindle to take action and a deal between the publishers and kindle to offer lower prices through, perhaps, Amazon to kindle customers in return for protection - well that is more than possible.

Kindle is part of Amazon. No separation even of the wholly owned subsidiary version. Does your left thumb make it's own deals and decisions?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Kindle is part of Amazon. No separation even of the wholly owned subsidiary version. Does your left thumb make it's own deals and decisions?

Do you think Bezos personally signs off on every decision every executive in every unit ever takes?

Amazon is an Empire and each unit is run by its own bureaucracy.

That is why Audible has one set of policies, KDP another, and APub a third. They aren't all even in the same time zones.

So yes, they not only each make their own decisions and deals, they also pay each other when they cooperate. It's part of how the profitability of the units is measured. And how the execs are evaluated.

Each unit has a mission statement --make money-- and a lot of latitude about how to do it.
They won't sabotage each other but they won't bleed for each other either.

[DiapDealer]

So you're saying that the "Kindle" division of Amazon has the authority to make deals with publishers? That authors publish through the "Kindle" division? That "Amazon" wouldn't have to be involved in any plan to change how Kindle devices deal with sideloaded content? Because that's what's being suggested.

Of course the Kindle division is it's own entity. But are you seriously suggesting that that same hardware/software/marketing division has direct access to publishers and can broker deals with them?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

So you're saying that the "Kindle" division of Amazon has the authority to make deals with publishers? That authors publish through the "Kindle" division? That "Amazon" wouldn't have to be involved in any plan to change how Kindle devices deal with sideloaded content? Because that's what's being suggested.

Of course the Kindle division is it's own entity. But are you seriously suggesting that that same hardware/software/marketing division has direct access to publishers and can broker deals with them?

Actually, they do and they have.

Look at Kindle unlimited: there are traditionally published titles in there. On a case by case basis. Who negotiated those ebook-specific deals?
Bezos?
The head of AWS?
The head of Amazon LLC?
The head of APub?

For that matter, APub's translated books group signs deals with foreign publishers all the time.

When it comes to the ereaders the Lab126 guys have a lot of say since they are the ones coding the software. And the AWS guys managing the Kindle clouds.

It all hinges on what part of Amazon and what publisher you're talking about.
S&S, for example, gets higher level attention than a micropress. Well run companies delegate authority to the appropriate level.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Look at Kindle unlimited: there are traditionally published titles in there. On a case by case basis. Who negotiated those ebook-specific deals?
Bezos?
The head of AWS?
The head of Amazon LLC?
The head of APub?

None of those entities you've mentioned are "Kindle." Thank you for helping to prove my point. "Kindle" cannot negotiate a deal with publishers to alter firmware to detect pirated books as was being suggested. Mainly because "Kindle" does not exist as a distinct and autonomous Amazon subsidiary with access to (or influence over) publishers and/or publisher contracts.

The notion that "Kindle" could somehow make this happen without involving Amazon at all is just silly. Kindle is still Amazon no matter how you slice it.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Each unit has a mission statement --make money-- and a lot of latitude about how to do it.
They won't sabotage each other but they won't bleed for each other either.

Hmmm... given my experience with various large corporations over the years, if one division could sabotage another division with a near enough to zero chance of being held responsible ("plausible deniability" is such a lovely phrase ), I tend to the view that they would go for it. Take a look at the old IBM culture for a near pathological example.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Hmmm... given my experience with various large corporations over the years, if one division could sabotage another division with a near enough to zero chance of being held responsible ("plausible deniability" is such a lovely phrase ), I tend to the view that they would go for it. Take a look at the old IBM culture for a near pathological example.

Yep, I've seen that pretty much every large corporation that I've worked at and I've worked at several. Based on what I read, Amazon is more like a consulting firm culture where the knives are out pretty openly.

Actually, having lots of freedom from division to division is probably a good idea for Amazon. What works with respect to books may not work for Audible or WholeFood.

[EndStop]

Ok. Confession. I didn't know Kindle was part of Amazon. Feel free to mock with the condition that I can mock with what I know n you don't. Like...um well maybe I will think of sommat.

Not a Kindle owner. Do like the idea of a cheap pad that can display an Ebook for hours without a cable but will stick with cable, laptop and freedom. Besides, a laptop sits on my lap. A pad has to be held.