Ethics and legalities of format shifting

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

There is real piracy, mostly by criminals or commercial organisations. The idea that any private individual removing DRM and format shifting for personal consumption of stuff they actually bought would be sued or prosecuted is fantasy. And there are vested interests that don't want such court cases as it might actually unravel DRM. There is no basis for DRM other than to control the customer. It has almost no effect on piracy.

Yes, but each of the pirate books must have been de-DRMed by someone who knows the DRM account data - otherwise it is not possible.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by hildea

I'm aware that what I do hurt Amazon

It really doesn't, they are making more money from you buying eBooks to read on another device than someone who bought a Kindle but never bought any books from them.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Quoth

...

I was correcting misinformation about the legal position.

I offered no statement (in that post) about the ethical position.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

What is this excuse?
If a paper book has died (moldy, burned), you have to buy it again if you want to read it again.
Or if the paper book is no longer available, then you can no longer buy or read it

There's an important difference. I can take various measures to ensure my paper books are safe from damage. It's my business and my responsibility only. No one else can just stroll in and make my books vanish by snapping their fingers. Whereas with the DRMed ebooks, it's out of my hands. I'm dependent on booksellers and DRM servers being in business. I can legally do nothing myself to ensure the safety of my purchases. As has already been said many times, this is not acceptable to many, many people.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

@ottischwenk, when Microsoft shut down their DRM servers, all the MS Reader (LIT) eBooks that had DRM were then unable to be read. Lots of people lost access to legally purchased eBooks.

Again - they didn't buy a book, just a license to read a file.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

There's an important difference. I can take various measures to ensure my paper books are safe from damage. It's my business and my responsibility only. No one else can just stroll in and make my books vanish by snapping their fingers. Whereas with the DRMed ebooks, it's out of my hands. I'm dependent on booksellers and DRM servers being in business. I can legally do nothing myself to ensure the safety of my purchases. As has already been said many times, this is not acceptable to many, many people.

This statement is also wrong - the servers are only needed initially, then no longer.
You are also responsible for the condition of your device with which you view the file.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Long outdated and no longer valid.

Nonsense. The links were to the latest versions of the laws. The UK link was to the 1988 act, with all amendments included.

You appear to be unfamiliar with how laws are changed. Legislatures don't chuck out an old law and bring in an entirely new law with a new name and date. They almost always amend the existing law.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Nonsense. The links were to the latest versions of the laws. The UK link was to the 1988 act, with all amendments included.

You appear to be unfamiliar with how laws are changed. Legislatures don't chuck out an old law and bring in an entirely new law with a new name and date. They almost always amend the existing law.

But at least you obviously overslept or deliberately omitted the big EU reform.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

But you apparently overslept or deliberately omitted the big EU reform.

What big EU reform? The big EU reform was the Directive I linked to that required members to implement anti-circumvention measures.

If you think there was 'big EU reform' after that, please provide a link to the relevant directive, and specify which sections you mean.

I think you don't know what you're talking about.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

This statement is also wrong - the servers are only needed initially, then no longer.
You are also responsible for the condition of your device with which you view the file.

The servers will be needed if the app stops working and I need to install and register it again. As actually happens pretty often with both Kindle and Kobo apps. And I can do nothing to ensure the apps won't stop working. That's out of my hands. Now my device may still be in pristine condition, but if the app stops working and the owner of the app is no longer in business, then I'll be screwed. Through no fault or lack of responsibility of my own.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

The servers will be needed if the app stops working and I need to install and register it again. As actually happens pretty often with both Kindle and Kobo apps. And I can do nothing to ensure the apps won't stop working. That's out of my hands. Now my device may still be in pristine condition, but if the app stops working and the owner of the app is no longer in business, then I'll be screwed. Through no fault or lack of responsibility of my own.

And why don't you have a backup of the app?
I only need Google Play once for each app I use, then no more.
And I don't care if the creator remains active.
Files once viewed by an app will continue to be displayed by this version of the app.

[gtriever]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

(edited for brevity) ...
Personally once I buy a book it is mine to do what I want with it. That means downloading to my pc, sending it to Calibre for disinfection if needed, formatting it to suit my preferences and then putting said book on all my devices so that I can read it with whatever device I choose.

The authors get their money, and I get to enjoy my book. These books and devices always stay in my poccession, so there is nothing to worry about.

THIS, exactly. When Barnes & Noble stopped allowing downloads to backup, I stopped buying from B&N, and let them know about it. In fact, I got a call from one of the B&N Coporate VPs offering me a new Nook reader if I'd reconsider. My short answer: Nope, not without the ability to download and save my purchases.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

And why don't you have a backup of the app?
I only need Google Play once for each app I use, then no more.
And I don't care if the creator remains active.
Files once viewed by an app will continue to be displayed by this version of the app.

What's the use of that? Even if you install your Kindle or Kobo app from the backup, you'll still need to register it again. And you can only do that while the servers are still running.

[hildea]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It really doesn't, they are making more money from you buying eBooks to read on another device than someone who bought a Kindle but never bought any books from them.

Well, yes, you're right. I wanted to be preemptive in case ottischwenk decided to derail my question about harm to authors with a claim about harm to publishers. Instead they *) decided not to answer at all. Of course, this thread mostly consists of a lot of us arguing against them, so it's no wonder they don't answer all posts.

*) Singular "they", since I don't know ottischwenk's pronouns.


I do avoid buying from Amazon if I have alternatives, because I don't like their business practices and market dominance, but some books - especially by authors who are new to self-publishing - are only available there. I'll make an exception to my Amazon-avoidance in such cases.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

What's the use of that? Even if you install your Kindle or Kobo app from the backup, you'll still need to register it again. And you can only do that while the servers are still running.

I don't know the Kobo app, my reinstallation from a backup of the Kindle app didn't require a new login to read my Kindle books on the device.