Why are DRM ebooks evil and why should I avoid them like the plague?

[Caltsar]

B&N uses an updated version of the DRM that has an encryption key tied to your name and part of your credit card number. This key is generated when you download a title and doesn't require access to the content server like the old version of ADE. The content server is still used for certain aspects of the DRM, but simply opening a book you buy can be done offline. (I believe activating the device the first time downloads the encryption key from the ADE Content servers... it's tricky to figure out when official documentation is almost impossible to find)

The only time the B&N ADE DRM (which is being adopted by more eBook readers now) will cause inconvenience due to a new credit card number is when you both have a new credit card, no longer have a record of the old number, can no longer redownload a copy from the source, AND you want to strip the DRM... The content server should have all of your keys associated with your account, so reading on an official device shouldn't be a problem (once again, only based on observation of how this system works from the outside.)

If you strip the DRM off B&N books, you are probably already saving your key anyway... which doesn't require storing your credit card number.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

The only DRM I have ever had to deal with is the standard Adobe Adept DRM. Since I always remove that impediment straight away I've never had an issue with it. So this DRM that is linked to say a credit card number? Does that require punching in that number each time the book is accessed? I would not like that at all.

Don't know how it works on a Nook, but for my JBL, which is compatible with BN's DRM, I had to punch in the info for the CC on file at my BN account the first time I tried to open a BN book, and then all other BN books opened with no additional hassle.

When I changed the card on file at my BN account, I had to enter the new info. I am not 100 percent sure, since it was several months ago, but I think I could no longer open any of the books downloaded with the old CC. I believe I had to redownload them from BN in order to access them. After that, I called on Apprentice Alf.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by TheSFReader

Hi Kenny, as a Nook owner, I'm quite interested in that last assertion. Do you have links ?

I may be mistaken, I thought it changed when they released the original nook and then again (unless it was the same time) when they allowed LOANING of books.

If the encryption still relies on the credit card number then I am certainly wrong. I've not purchased a B&N book in a while now...

Originally Posted by pdurrant

So people who buy books should be penalised to allow people who don't buy books to continue to get books for free?

Thinking about it further it really is a false conflict. There is no reason why ebooks sold to the public could be without any DRM while the same ebooks sold to a library system (say Overdrive) for lending to the public could incorporate DRM. Unless the objection is to the whole idea of people being able to read books for “free” from libraries. Then that has nothing to do with DRM and applies just as well to paper books.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Thinking about it further it really is a false conflict. There is no reason why ebooks sold to the public could be without any DRM while the same ebooks sold to a library system (say Overdrive) for lending to the public could incorporate DRM. Unless the objection is to the whole idea of people being able to read books for “free” from libraries. Then that has nothing to do with DRM and applies just as well to paper books.

The question is whether the library market is big enough to support the DRM software manufacturers on their own. The argument is that without DRM on books in general, developing and maintaining DRM software would not be a viable business.

But if it's possible while still dropping DRM on sold ebooks, I am perfectly happy for libraries to have DRM on ebooks. Library books are a temporary loan, and people will be perfectly willing to put up with the minor hassle for the benefit of ebook loans, just like they're willing to put up with the hassle of returning physical books to the library.

[EowynCarter]

The question is whether the library market is big enough to support the DRM software manufacturers on their own. The argument is that without DRM on books in general, developing and maintaining DRM software would not be a viable business.

Oh. I didn't though about that, but good point.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

The question is whether the library market is big enough to support the DRM software manufacturers on their own. The argument is that without DRM on books in general, developing and maintaining DRM software would not be a viable business.

If a business is viable but not necessary, the answer is literal corporate welfare -- that is, cutting them a check from tax money to stay in business. It's the same effect (charging everyone X amount to keep the company running) without the harm to the market and to the customers in the process.

Yeah, it looks different when you look at it that way. But that's what allowing DRM companies to levy a tax in both money and inconvenience on every book buyer in order to stay in business really is ... and that is, of course, assuming that they couldn't stay in business otherwise.

[avantman42]

There is another point about DRM that I've not seen addressed anywhere on MR yet.

Copyright protection lasts for a limited time. DRM protection doesn't. DRM will still stop you making copies after the copyright expires, even though once the copyright expires, the book goes into the public domain and making copies is legal.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by avantman42

Copyright protection lasts for a limited time.

This is technically true, of course. It it doesn't get extended again (Hello, Disney!) we're talking about life + 70 years. Unless we are talking about re-releases near the end of that term (where the author has been dead for, say, 60+ years) I don't think we'll have to worry about that just yet, certainly not for new books by a living author. The file will long since have become unreadable anyway before copyright expires.

Even so: PD books, too, come with DRM these days. Ridiculous, but there you have it.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by avantman42

There is another point about DRM that I've not seen addressed anywhere on MR yet.

Copyright protection lasts for a limited time. DRM protection doesn't. DRM will still stop you making copies after the copyright expires, even though once the copyright expires, the book goes into the public domain and making copies is legal.

A good point. It doesn't affect many ebooks yet, of course, and none at all in the USA where nothing new has entered or will enter the public domain from 1st January 1999 to 31st December 2018.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by avantman42

There is another point about DRM that I've not seen addressed anywhere on MR yet.

Copyright protection lasts for a limited time. DRM protection doesn't. DRM will still stop you making copies after the copyright expires, even though once the copyright expires, the book goes into the public domain and making copies is legal.

As has been said innumerable times here, DRM does not prevent copying or backing up.

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by kennyc

As has been said innumerable times here, DRM does not prevent copying or backing up.

I said the same thing myself earlier in this thread. My point was that DRM doesn't try to enforce the protections given by copyright law, it tries to enforce those protections and extra restrictions, which is one of the reasons I don't like DRM (in it's current form, at least). Whether or not it manages to do so is another point entirely.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by avantman42

I said the same thing myself earlier in this thread. My point was that DRM doesn't try to enforce the protections given by copyright law, it tries to enforce those protections and extra restrictions, which is one of the reasons I don't like DRM (in it's current form, at least). Whether or not it manages to do so is another point entirely.

If that's true then you misstated something in your most recent statement which simply isn't true.

You said, "DRM will still stop you making copies after the copyright expires.."

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by kennyc

If that's true then you misstated something in your most recent statement which simply isn't true.

You said, "DRM will still stop you making copies after the copyright expires.."

I think you're being pedantic, but you're right. None the less, DRM is designed to enforce greater rights than copyright law bestows.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

This is technically true, of course. It it doesn't get extended again (Hello, Disney!) we're talking about life + 70 years. Unless we are talking about re-releases near the end of that term (where the author has been dead for, say, 60+ years) I don't think we'll have to worry about that just yet, certainly not for new books by a living author. The file will long since have become unreadable anyway before copyright expires.

Even so: PD books, too, come with DRM these days. Ridiculous, but there you have it.

Oh? Remember the Atlas Shrugged fiasco?