E-Book Piracy: The Publishing Industry's Next Epic Saga?

[DawnFalcon]

There's a difference between copy protection and DRM, although modern IP industries like to confuse the two as much as they can. Copy protection can be done by DRM or by other methods, and generally doesn't generate consumer ire. The moment DRM moves beyond that, whump, ire.

i.e. People don't tend to care too much they can't easily make 1:1 copies of their DVD videos. They do care when regional restrictions on disks stop them playing their disk.


The content delivery platform Impulse is a fascinating study in this. It dosn't enforce DRM on items sold through it, but ties everything to accounts, which it will suspend if geolocation and frequency of usage shows clearly abusive patterns. This doesn't disable disk installs, it just means that updates, multiplayer and future downloads become unavailable. Even power users are never going to bump into these limits.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Biometric DRM has been absolutely and totally dead on arrival in the market because customers are not interested, in any way shape or form. It arrived on some laptops in the 06-07 period, and promptly vanished again because of near-zero usage.

This doesn't mean biometric DRM will never, ever happen... just that it hasn't been perfected yet (much like e-book DRM).

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Your assumption that customers are criminals: "Valuable products need some level of security" dosn't fly in the market. This has been proven repeatedly. Even fairly non-intrusive DRM slashes your customer base each and every time it's encountered or reported on.

My statement does not "assume that customers are criminals." It merely states the realities of the product market. How many stores do you know of that have no locks or security? How many online stores do you know of that allow you to buy with a credit card, and don't ask for your ID info? Why do you think that is? Criminals are criminals... customers accept the notion that they have to pay for products, and the security is there to foil the criminals.

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Incidentally, I lived in an certain area of Oxford for 2 1/2 years. We never locked the front door. There was no need.

That's nice. Unfortunately, there are a few people here and there in the world that cannot make the same claim.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Most of those contracts and agreements are in place to protect their control of the distribution of content to consumers. They would rather lose some sales than threaten their power base.

Certainly true and they are attempting to continue the status quo in the digital realm rather than re-engineering/re-designing the system.

[Bob T]

Steve...although it is only anecdotal evidence, I'm going to say that most people I know who read books, share books.
And I think it is very important...
That is one of the ways we exchange thoughts, ideas and the love of books in general...
People who would willingly try a book outside of their normal interests, if you hand it to them off of your self, may not try it, if they have to buy it....

Perhaps we will learn to live without it, but if we do, we will have damaged a major part of the "reading experience"...

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

That's not to say that sharing shouldn't be desired, but that it, along with other subsidiary functions (like resale, something else a lot of people don't do and wouldn't miss)

I think you're grossly underestimating the amount of sharing and the size of the used book store market.

We can't expect to be able to do all the same things we did with paper...

Why not? Your rights as a consumer concerning IP have nothing to do with whether the delivery of the product is physical or digital.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Bob T

Steve...although it is only anecdotal evidence, I'm going to say that most people I know who read books, share books.

I'm not challenging that. I will say that most people I know, upon reading a good book, recommend it to others, or buy it for them as gifts. And if e-books manage to develop a lower price-point, maybe the process of buying it will be significantly less painful for you and your friends, and remove the issue you mentioned.

Maybe not...

I'm just saying: Media changes sometimes force other changes, and not all of them will be desirable; but hopefully the gains will balance out the losses.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

This doesn't mean biometric DRM will never, ever happen... just that it hasn't been perfected yet (much like e-book DRM).

It's already missed. No major company is seriously proposing it's use in consumer electronics anymore.

My statement does not "assume that customers are criminals." It merely states the realities of the product market.

It's the mindset involved. To be blunt: Customer's don't give a **** about your problems with criminals, they want the goods cheaply and without hassle. Jack the price up or make it a hassle, and you'll simply lose a lot of them - many to the darknets.

That's nice. Unfortunately, there are a few people here and there in the world that cannot make the same claim.

You made an absolute claim. It's not true. There have allways been shades of grey in this, and at the end of the day iTunes is showing that most people will pay to play. Alienating the vast majority to try and turn the final percentages into customers is not good business sense. More, there's every evidence that the best customers are also often users of the darknets, so they don't have far to go if you do drive them away.

Why does every online industry have to find this out the hard way?


And darn straight Shaggy. Simply because something is electronic doesn't mean the rights don't apply. I'd love to see someone (under UK law) try and argue that a contract concluded by email wasn't valid...

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

My statement does not "assume that customers are criminals." It merely states the realities of the product market. How many stores do you know of that have no locks or security?

Quite a few, actually. Around here a lot of the big stores (grocery stores, hardware stores, etc) are going to the "self checkout" model. You walk up to a machine, scan your own products, and then pay via an ATM type interface. There is no human working the register, and usually no security staff standing by the door checking bags. The whole things is based on the "honor system".

Such companies have publicly stated that yes, they do see an increase in theft, however they rely on the fact that most people are honest. In the end they end up making more money, even with the increased theft, because of cost savings that the automation provides.

Some people will always steal from them, but they know that lowering costs and increasing value to their customers will mean the ones who do pay will keep coming back.

[Happ]

I do not believe in unbreakable DRM. Nor does the industry. Alas, no one believes in unbreakable physical locks on doors. And still we use them. The industry just wants a DRM solution that most people would not bother to break although it is possible to break. iTunes was a success in this regard. The funny thing about it was that iTunes started to abolish DRM because those who pirate can break it anyway and most people seems to be willing to pay even if they can get the same for free on the darkweb. For me this is the point that should be pressed: sell it to people, make it easy to pay, and sell it cheap, abolish geographic barriers, and do that for a couple of years to see the result. At the same time educate people for the necessity of paying for what they really use (not for what they download). Hey, remember shareware? That was a neat idea: download it, try it, pay for it if you like it enough to continue to use it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Why not?

Think about it: Do you watch a play in a theatre the same way you watch a TV show? Do you drive a car the same way you ride a horse?

We have to expect that, in the transition from paper to digital, there will be changes in the way we do things, both better and worse (hopefully mostly better). And yes, that might mean changes in the rights we have as consumers with the products, including resale, sharing, copyright restrictions, etc. Consumer rights have altered to fit the advance of technology before (traffic laws, for instance). E-books will likely be no different: Their adoption will cause change to the process of enjoying literature. If they don't... why in the world are we bothering with it?

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I'm just saying: Media changes sometimes force other changes, and not all of them will be desirable; but hopefully the gains will balance out the losses.

The "losses" you are talking about are not something inherent to the media change. They're coming from the companies trying to force them on us in order to bump up their business. There is nothing about the change from pBooks to eBooks that would require a loss of existing sharing or resale.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

We have to expect that, in the transition from paper to digital, there will be changes in the way we do things, both better and worse (hopefully mostly better). And yes, that might mean changes in the rights we have as consumers with the products, including resale, sharing, copyright restrictions, etc.

None of these changes have anything to do with the transition from paper to digital media. The consumer rights you're talking about have nothing to do with the specific media the content is being delivered on.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

The "losses" you are talking about are not something inherent to the media change. They're coming from the companies trying to force them on us in order to bump up their business. There is nothing about the change from pBooks to eBooks that would require a loss of existing sharing or resale.

I don't think that argument is true. The form (particularly in this case) dictates the potential simply because of the ease of making a perfect copy with little effort. And it's really that that the industry is attempting to control with DRM or lawsuits against so called piracy.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Think about it: Do you watch a play in a theatre the same way you watch a TV show? Do you drive a car the same way you ride a horse?

Sorry, those examples are just terrible. I understand your point, but you are talking about two examples (cars and plays) that physically have no way of satisfying the same experiences (horses and TV). It is just impossible.

Digital media has the possibility to share, exactly like physical media. It is not impossible. It just doesn't have the will. Its a completely different situation.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Happ

Hey, remember shareware? That was a neat idea: download it, try it, pay for it if you like it enough to continue to use it.

There is a pretty heated discussion about this topic on a (private) games industry forum I'm a member of. Quite a few people are strongly and vocally in favour of reintroducing shareware to the mass market.

In it's day, it depended on magazine cover CD's to get it's products out there - and when the focus moved on from them, it faded away. But now, the majority of customers have fast enough computers to download the shareware...

I think they have a good point, myself. Heck, what do you call Baen's free samples of books other than shareware?