How to get rid of DRM?

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Let me test my understanding:

1. The music industry gave up on DRM in hopes that allowing Amazon to offer DRM-free music would break Apple's monopoly on digital music sales and also because ripping DRM-free music from a CD was so easy as to make DRM pointless.

2. With books, Amazon was the one with a monopoly, and book publishers along with Apple tried to counter that with agency pricing, which blew up in their faces. With the exception of an enlightened few who have gone DRM-free, most big publishers are heading in the opposite direction and tightening DRM, pressuring Barnes & Noble to increase their security and prompting Adobe to develop "hardened DRM" starting with ADE 3.

3. That said, DRM-removal tools are readily available, making it a non-issue for people who want to remove DRM. That, in addition to most people being unruffled by DRM and willing to stay locked in their chosen eco-system, means there's virtually no pressure on publishers or booksellers to stop using DRM, resulting in "a silly 'we have DRM but you can remove it' situation," to quote RobertDDL.

The only wrinkle here is that in some (many?) places, circumventing DRM is either illegal or in a legal gray area. Here at MobileRead there are limits on what can be discussed with regard to DRM removal, suggesting these laws are not entirely toothless -- which leads to the next question:

What is the likelihood that anti-circumvention laws will ever be tested and upheld in court against non-pirate readers who just want to read ebooks on the device of their choice?

I don't know that publishers are going in the opposite direction. I suspect that the tightening of DRM was being pushed more B&N than by the publishers.

To answer your question, I think there is very little likelihood that the anti-circumvention laws will ever be tested in court against individuals who just want to read ebooks on the device of their choice. I haven't seen anyone in the ebook industry go after individuals like the music industry did.

[Jane12]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I don't know that publishers are going in the opposite direction. I suspect that the tightening of DRM was being pushed more B&N than by the publishers.

I'm not so sure about that. When I complained to B&N that I could no longer download my books or open them in Bluefire Reader or even Adobe Digital Editions (both of which incorporate the passcode-based social DRM option that B&N used to use), I was told the recent "security enhancements" were in response to publishers wanting them to upgrade their security.

Also this from Publisher's Weekly:

HarperCollins has started using Digimarc Corp.’s watermarking system for e-books to provide an extra layer of security ... Although the system is capable of identifying consumers who download e-books illegally, HC is using it to make sure that its e-tailers “are using the highest degree of security possible,” Restivo-Alessi said. If the Guardian Watermarking finds e-books that are being downloaded illegally, they will ask that e-tailer to either upgrade their security efforts or risk being dropped as an account.[emphasis added]

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Let me test my understanding:

What is the likelihood that anti-circumvention laws will ever be tested and upheld in court against non-pirate readers who just want to read ebooks on the device of their choice?

In the US?

Very low. On both counts.

Mostly because the publishers really have little interest in going after DeDRM tool users. Lots of posturing, lots of focus on hardening DRM, but little interest in going to court. It is too risky for them.

Books are not music and ebooks are not as easily digitized as music.
And books aren't consumed the way music is consumed.
The big threat to the music studios wasn't from disinfected music files but from ripped CD files, which are easy to produce, and there was no viable legal alternative at the turn of the century. What the studios were selling (full albums at $10+) was not what consumers wanted (cheap hit singles) when the first viable MP3 players appeared so there was a vacuum that first Napster and then Apple tried to fill.

The real problem, though, was that iTunes wasn't a complete solution (too tied to Apple hardware) and it came too late. The idea that music was easy to get for free was common knowledge and established even among the non-techie mainstream. "Casual" piracy of music is common even today. The only real counter is almost as big a problem: streaming music services.

eBooks, on the other hand, offered consumers a complete solution almost from the beginning of the Kindle era: thecommercial ebooks were and are, for the most part, reasonably priced and more convenient than piracy. And since there is little value in large ebook collections for mainstream customers ebook piracy has not yet become a mainstream practice.

If you look at the download counts for the tools, you'll find that tool users run in tens of thousands, *maybe* a hundred thousand or so, whereas Nook and Kobo can easily claim user bases in the ten million range and Kindle well over 50M.

The reality is that:

1- Most commercial ebook buyers are not inconvenienced enough by ebook prices or DRM to seek alternatives to either. eBooks have not become napsterized nor do they look to be napsterized any time soon.

2- Unlike music, there is an ample supply of quality, legally-free ebook content from the public domain, libraries, and promos.

3- The tools themselves work only on legally purchased books.

4- The number of people actually using the tools is low and most do it for personal use, not for online distribution.

For all the handwringing and paranoia on the publishing side, there really isn't much ebook piracy in the US, compared to the legal sales volume. And, given the various Fair Use precedents it is not a slam dunk win to go after a normal consumer even using DMCA.

"Casual" ebook piracy in the US is at worst petty shoplifting and not worth going after in court for the corporate publishers which is why they are so focused on hardening DRM to keep it at current low levels. Of course, too much hardening can prove counterproductive for the retailer and eventually the publishers. But since publishing doesn't really get the whole "big picture" thing they'll likely keep on pushing until they drive mainstream customers to piracy.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

In the US?
"Casual" ebook piracy in the US is at worst petty shoplifting and not worth going after in court for the corporate publishers which is why they are so focused on hardening DRM to keep it at current low levels. Of course, too much hardening can prove counterproductive for the retailer and eventually the publishers. But since publishing doesn't really get the whole "big picture" thing they'll likely keep on pushing until they drive mainstream customers to piracy.

First, circumventing DRM on legally purchased media, is in no way piracy of any kind, casual or otherwise. Piracy is a criminal act. DRM, while sold as an anti-piracy measure, has no demonstrable impact on piracy. All the "hardening" of DRM, that publishers may insist upon, will have no impact on piracy, except to make it potentially profitable. So I not only agree that they could "drive mainstream customers to piracy", but that it could also drive piracy to mainstream customers.

Luck;
Ken

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

In the US?

Very low. On both counts.

Mostly because the publishers really have little interest in going after DeDRM tool users. Lots of posturing, lots of focus on hardening DRM, but little interest in going to court. It is too risky for them.

Books are not music and ebooks are not as easily digitized as music.
And books aren't consumed the way music is consumed.
The big threat to the music studios wasn't from disinfected music files but from ripped CD files, which are easy to produce, and there was no viable legal alternative at the turn of the century. What the studios were selling (full albums at $10+) was not what consumers wanted (cheap hit singles) when the first viable MP3 players appeared so there was a vacuum that first Napster and then Apple tried to fill.

The real problem, though, was that iTunes wasn't a complete solution (too tied to Apple hardware) and it came too late. The idea that music was easy to get for free was common knowledge and established even among the non-techie mainstream. "Casual" piracy of music is common even today. The only real counter is almost as big a problem: streaming music services.

eBooks, on the other hand, offered consumers a complete solution almost from the beginning of the Kindle era: thecommercial ebooks were and are, for the most part, reasonably priced and more convenient than piracy. And since there is little value in large ebook collections for mainstream customers ebook piracy has not yet become a mainstream practice.

If you look at the download counts for the tools, you'll find that tool users run in tens of thousands, *maybe* a hundred thousand or so, whereas Nook and Kobo can easily claim user bases in the ten million range and Kindle well over 50M.

The reality is that:

1- Most commercial ebook buyers are not inconvenienced enough by ebook prices or DRM to seek alternatives to either. eBooks have not become napsterized nor do they look to be napsterized any time soon.

2- Unlike music, there is an ample supply of quality, legally-free ebook content from the public domain, libraries, and promos.

3- The tools themselves work only on legally purchased books.

4- The number of people actually using the tools is low and most do it for personal use, not for online distribution.

For all the handwringing and paranoia on the publishing side, there really isn't much ebook piracy in the US, compared to the legal sales volume. And, given the various Fair Use precedents it is not a slam dunk win to go after a normal consumer even using DMCA.

"Casual" ebook piracy in the US is at worst petty shoplifting and not worth going after in court for the corporate publishers which is why they are so focused on hardening DRM to keep it at current low levels. Of course, too much hardening can prove counterproductive for the retailer and eventually the publishers. But since publishing doesn't really get the whole "big picture" thing they'll likely keep on pushing until they drive mainstream customers to piracy.

The darknet ebook culture was very different from the pirate music/movie sites, or at least it was the last time I checked on such things. The people in the old darknet ebook culture were a lot more interested in scanning in books than they were in posted de-DRM'ed ebooks. I think that it's safe to say that Amazon isn't going to do anything that is going to make it harder for customers to read ebooks and right now, Amazon is the 800 lb gorilla of the ebook world.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

First, circumventing DRM on legally purchased media, is in no way piracy of any kind, casual or otherwise. Piracy is a criminal act. DRM, while sold as an anti-piracy measure, has no demonstrable impact on piracy. All the "hardening" of DRM, that publishers may insist upon, will have no impact on piracy, except to make it potentially profitable. So I not only agree that they could "drive mainstream customers to piracy", but that it could also drive piracy to mainstream customers.

Luck;
Ken

"Casual" piracy as defined by content providers is gifting/sharing content to family and personal friends, not uploading. And not personal use DeDRM-ing. It's a middle ground. It is making a copy of a CD for the neighbor.

Hardening is intended to keep any sharing within the licensed account. Given that most ebookstore licenses allow multiple devices to be tied to an account, there is a lot of sharing that can be performed legally among family members. Which is why there is so little of it in the ebook arena. But in the worldview of publishing any non-zero amount is too much.

Yeah, good luck getting there.

[Calenorn]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

... at the turn of the century.

Thanks. Now I feel OLD!!!!

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Let me test my understanding:

1. The music industry gave up on DRM in hopes that allowing Amazon to offer DRM-free music would break Apple's monopoly on digital music sales and also because ripping DRM-free music from a CD was so easy as to make DRM pointless.

I really don't think that's true. Apple always allowed the sale of DRM-free music; it was the record companies who insisted on DRM. iTunes always allowed the user both to rip CDs and to burn CDs from purchased content, even if the content had DRM.

2. With books, Amazon was the one with a monopoly, and book publishers along with Apple tried to counter that with agency pricing, which blew up in their faces.

That is self-evidently untrue. Amazon are not a monopoly. There are other bookstores.

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by HarryT

[...]

That is self-evidently untrue. Amazon are not a monopoly. There are other bookstores.

The US (and UK) legal definition of 'monopoly' doesn't require 100 %

The EU defines it as 'dominant position' - less likely to be casually misunderstood.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by Jane12

I'm not so sure about that. When I complained to B&N that I could no longer download my books or open them in Bluefire Reader or even Adobe Digital Editions (both of which incorporate the passcode-based social DRM option that B&N used to use), I was told the recent "security enhancements" were in response to publishers wanting them to upgrade their security.

Also this from Publisher's Weekly:

If I understand, Watermarks do not stop you from using on devices. They are traceable (not a tracking device), unique to the supply chain. Where did this book leak from?

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I really don't think that's true. Apple always allowed the sale of DRM-free music; it was the record companies who insisted on DRM. iTunes always allowed the user both to rip CDs and to burn CDs from purchased content, even if the content had DRM.



That is self-evidently untrue. Amazon are not a monopoly. There are other bookstores.

The music industry allowed Amazon to sell DRM free mp3 files, while not allowing Apple to do so. Apple always wanted to go the DRM free route. Jobs was very vocal about it.

[Jane12]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

"Casual" piracy as defined by content providers is gifting/sharing content to family and personal friends, not uploading. And not personal use DeDRM-ing .... It is making a copy of a CD for the neighbor.

I think this is why publishers insisted B&N upgrade their security. B&N's social DRM made it easy to share books with friends and family, no DRM removal required. All you had to do was input your username and CC in their device, and they would be able to read any book you gave them going forward. If you make them close their eyes while you do it, they won't even know your CC as it's immediately translated into a passhash and not recorded in the device anywhere.

[odamizu]

Originally Posted by theducks

If I understand, Watermarks do not stop you from using on devices. They are traceable (not a tracking device), unique to the supply chain. Where did this book leak from?

I agree. I have no problem with watermarking. In fact, it's preferable to "lock-down" DRM methods since it discourages piracy without interfering with one's ability to read on one's chosen device. However, HarperCollins appears to be using watermarking in addition to lock-down DRM specifically to identify which types of DRM are being circumvented -- and the answer to that is pretty much all: Amazon, BN, Kobo, Google, other Adobe.

Of course, not all DRM-circumventers are pirates, and Alf and MobileRead both condemn piracy, but there's nothing stopping a pirate from using the tools. If just a few pirates upload watermarked books, publishers could insist that all the above booksellers tighten security, thwarting not just pirates, but also non-pirates who just want to read books on the device of their choosing.