Tor/Forge Books Announces DRM-Free E-book Store

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Because the BPH want to have Amazon play by their rules. And since Amazon won't play by their rules, the BPH want to change the rules so Amazon has to play by them. I could easily see them cutting out Amazon in order to get their way.

What does that have to do with ePub?
If they wanted to do an end run around Amazon, they would sell unDRMd mobi files directly.
And none of that deals with the prisoners dilemma aspect. It may well be in all the PBHs interests for them all to refuse to deal with Amazon. But they cannot collude to agree to all do that, and it is not in any of their individual interests to unilaterally refuse to deal with Amazon.
Why would one PBH, alone from all the others, deliberately cut themselves off from all Kindle owners?

The PBHs want themselves to succeed. You want Amazon to fail. Those are not the same thing.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

See, we're not really that far apart in our thinking when it boils down to it... except maybe semantically. Because I agree with your above statement. I just don't think "never thought it would take off the way that it has" means the same thing as "couldn't possibly foresee it." Which is what stonetools (by way of Shatzkin) is asking me to believe. They're asking me to believe that the people wanting to sell ebooks saw a market that publishers couldn't possibly see. Nope. Sorry. They simply wrote off ebooks as a non-factor. Which is fine... but guessing wrong doesn't absolve you of anything... it's your industry. You were supposed to be on top of it and guess right. Others did after all.

You have to see the ebooks market through the publishers eyes though.

1) The price has to be the same or higher then the most expensive print version or it will erode their market.

2) The ebook has to be the same as a paper book in regards to what is favourable to the publishers otherwise they would have to renegotiate rights to books they already publish. If this means that geographical restrictions remain, too bad.

3) The ebook has to be totalyl different from a paper book in regards to what is favourable to the readers. You can't own a copy. You can't lend a copy to family or friends. You can't resell the copy you purchased. You just temporarily rent the right to read it but you still have to pay the same price.

4) All other benefits of ebooks have to be disabled so that we can charge more for them. Text to speech is only available at extra cost. Translations must be disabled. Printing must be disabled. Cut and paste must be disabled.

When you look at electronic books through those goggles, how could you have predicted they would take off the way they did?

[DiapDealer]

I'm not sure your numbered points are relevant to your final question, Barcey. Are you asking me how I could have predicted ebooks would have taken off the way they did despite my best efforts to put speed bumps and spike-strips in their (ebooks') path?

[Synamon]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Read those first couple of sentences again. Seriously. You've just indicated that there was an "ebook revolution" as far back as Microsoft Reader and the .LIT format. You've even indicated that there was a leading ebook seller before Amazon. I don't care about specific companies. I'm only addressing the fact that there were clear indicators that ebooks were going to be a big deal before Amazon or Apple or Sony ever entered the device/ereader/app picture. You just supplied further evidence of that. So can we drop the pretense that publishers were utterly blindsided by ebooks? Please?

There were harbingers. It was their industry. I don't know if they could have done anything about it—I don't really care. I just know they (or Shatzkin, or you) don't get to claim they got t-boned without warning by the ebook's popularity.

Agreed. They weren't blindsided by ebooks. They were blindsided by their own egos and their belief that they could hobble ebooks to the extent that only a few freaks would buy them to read on their computers or PDAs. What was happening to newspapers and magazines wasn't going to happen to them, nosirree. No free content gravy train with books, in fact they decided to charge hardcover prices for ebooks, slapped DRM on everything, and sat back to watch the fad play out. If a few idiots are willing to overpay for pixels who are they to complain? <snigger> Except they were wrong, people are actually willing to pay for the convenience digital offers. It wasn't a fad, it was a trend. Whoops. Amazon came along and picked up the reins, but the horses were out of the barn long before that.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

What does that have to do with ePub?
If they wanted to do an end run around Amazon, they would sell unDRMd mobi files directly.
And none of that deals with the prisoners dilemma aspect. It may well be in all the PBHs interests for them all to refuse to deal with Amazon. But they cannot collude to agree to all do that, and it is not in any of their individual interests to unilaterally refuse to deal with Amazon.
Why would one PBH, alone from all the others, deliberately cut themselves off from all Kindle owners?

The PBHs want themselves to succeed. You want Amazon to fail. Those are not the same thing.

The BPHs want Amazon to fail as Amazon is the thorn in their feet. They agreed to become the price fix six because they wanted to stick it to Amazon.

[JSWolf]

The BPHs were blindsided by how much eBooks would take away from the sales of hardcover books. There was no indication how many would switch to eBooks forgoing hardcover editions.

[DiapDealer]

There was no indication how many would switch to eBooks forgoing hardcover editions.

Unclear how many? I'm with ya. No indication?.. as in zero? Just not true. Quite a few people proved willing to pay hardcover prices for ebooks—pre-Sony, pre-Amazon even. It was not a complete crap-shoot. People were buying ebooks. And publishers were starting to put up stumbling blocks. They don't get to actively resist the "ebook revolution" AND claim they had no clue all at the same time.

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The BPHs want Amazon to fail as Amazon is the thorn in their feet. They agreed to become the price fix six because they wanted to stick it to Amazon.

So you have inside information?

Or is it just your general Amazon hate?

[Lynx-lynx]

If this question has been asked and answered oft times before, then please excuse my ignorance in advance .....

Does your country (each person's) specifically have rules / regs / laws / that say one can not break DRM on a purchased ebook in order to read said ebook on a device of their choice? (I am not talking about copying the book to other persons)

If there is some kind of caveat written by the seller into the purchase 'agreement' of the ebook stating that one can't read the ebook on any other device, and no State / Federal law regarding this issue, then any inconsistency would more likely than not (?) go in favour of the State / Federal law than the selling agent's intentions - that is no binding reason why a person can not remove the DRM.

I'm not sure that Australia has a law that says that I can't remove DRM in order to read a book that I have purchased on any device I choose.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by jgaiser

So you have inside information?

Or is it just your general Amazon hate?

Have you had your head in the sand? It's because of Amazon's discounting bestsellers to $9.99 that the price fix six came to be the price fix six.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

If this question has been asked and answered oft times before, then please excuse my ignorance in advance .....

Does your country (each person's) specifically have rules / regs / laws / that say one can not break DRM on a purchased ebook in order to read said ebook on a device of their choice? (I am not talking about copying the book to other persons)

In the U.S., it's technically illegal to break DRM (a digital lock) under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Canada will have similar provisions in force shortly.

[ApK]

In the US, the DMCA has wording that may seem to make any circumvention of DRM illegal, but courts have disagreed on the meaning, and there is other language in the law that gives reason to disagree on the scope.
Terms of Service often contain "only on the one device" language but TOSes that try to unfairly infringe on consumer's rights are likely to be unenforceable.

[Lynx-lynx]

Ninjalawyer when you say 'technically illegal' do you mean that the instance of removing DRM in order to view your purchased ebook on another device isn't specifically mentioned?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

In the U.S., it's technically illegal to break DRM (a digital lock) under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Canada will have similar provisions in force shortly.

In the US it is not technically illegal to break DRM. In fact, there are enough contradictions that it's not illegal until a judge rules it so.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Have you had your head in the sand? It's because of Amazon's discounting bestsellers to $9.99 that the price fix six came to be the price fix six.

Thst's ONE reason of MANY and that doesn't equate to we want Amazon, one of top outlets for our product, to fail because they discounted a few hundred titles lower than we wanted.