Ethics and legalities of format shifting

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

You posted the words. You are responsible for them.

Only to a certain extent, to what extent they correspond to the lexical meaning of a translation dictionary - however, I am in no way responsible for how the reader perceives and understands them, and what this causes and triggers in him.
His mind is his mind and I am not able to know how it works on him

[issybird]

Moderator Notice
Members are not to comment on potential violations, ask for adjudication in thread, or moderation. From the Guidelines:

12. When Things go Wrong

Do not comment about other member's possible guideline violations on open forum. Instead, please use the "report post" button to report any post that appears to contravene these guidelines. It is the button at the lower-left of posts and the upper right of private messages.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Only to a certain extent, to what extent they correspond to the lexical meaning of a translation dictionary - however, I am in no way responsible for how the reader perceives and understands them, and what this causes and triggers in him.
His mind is his mind and I am not able to know how it works on him

Yes, you are. And especially if you keep repeating the same thing over, and over and over again.

Calling people thieves in no way helped your argument. Repeating that is just demonstrating that the point is to insult people.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

Yes, you are. And especially if you keep repeating the same thing over, and over and over again.

Calling people thieves in no way helped your argument. Repeating that is just demonstrating that the point is to insult people.

No, it's my attempt to make people understand it.

But if someone feels offended, that is solely his problem.

I also respond to statements, not to a user - I don't care about this guy.
And if it comes to similar statements, then there are also similar answers.

And to get back to the subject.

In my opinion, DRM removal is unethical if it is used to read on an second an unsuitable device.
In this case another license would have to be bought and if not, ...

And the thoughtless excuse regarding switching off the server! DRM removal can be done - if necessary - afterwards.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

No - also a format change.

It's not against any law anywhere to change a file format. It MAY be against the law in some places to remove DRM.

I also have NO PROBLEM supporting Amazon's business practices with respect to their ebooks. I prefer Amazon -- even though I read on Apple devices.

I prefer Amazon because their DRM has been broken and Apple's has not. No matter the device, I want the ability to save my purchased books on my hardware. I have no problems whatsoever with the ethics of DRM stripping for personal archiving and format shifting reasons. None.

I buy books from Amazon. Cleanse them. Format shift them. Then read them on the same device I COULD just use the Amazon app. I happen to prefer a different app for reading and it's worth the extra hassle to go through those steps verses just reading via the Amazon app.

Amazon gets paid - the authors and publishers get paid. They are not going to come after me as I don't subsequently load my files onto file sharing sites.

I may occasionally pay more for a book because I don't normally price compare. No big deal to me.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

No, it's my attempt to make people understand it.

But you are only spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Based on my experiences with Intellectual Property law you have a poor grasp of the subject, of course that's just my opinion.

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

In my opinion, DRM removal is unethical if it is used to read on an second an unsuitable device.
In this case another license would have to be bought and if not, ...

In your opinion. And all experience suggests that no second licence is needed for a single user. Contracts or Terms and Conditions on Websites and in shrinkwrap software have been found to be void or even illegal when they are too restrictive. In any case they are separate from Copyright.

DRM itself is unethical and increasingly when it goes to court found to be actually illegally removing normal rights of the consumer and more restrictive than actual copyright. It only really makes money for the people selling DRM, and damages the reputation of companies using it. See Sony CD DRM fiasco. It has ZERO impact on commercial piracy. DRM is nothing to do with copyright. It's sometimes applied to PD works, it's still there when copyright has expired. It prevents fair use of excerpts for people not expert at IT.

Law is not as binary as you think and Ethics is another word for Morality and is more absolute than most think.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by leebase

It's not against any law anywhere to change a file format. It MAY be against the law in some places to remove DRM.

Even then it depends on what you do with the file afterwards. It's only theoretically illegal in some places if it's your own copy, not redistributed. Damages have to be proven.

Originally Posted by leebase

I prefer Amazon because their DRM has been broken and Apple's has not.

Actually it's just EASIER to circumvent Amazon's DRM on non-KFX.

There has never ever been any DRM that can't be circumvented. It's essentially a stupid extra cost and inconvenience to ordinary law abiding people and no barrier to commercial piracy (illegal redistribution).

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Law is not as binary as you think and Ethics is another word for Morality and is more absolute than most think.

Even here you are wrong.

Laws in particular are literally carried out (yes/no), while ethics and morals (religious point of view) depend exclusively on the environment.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Even then it depends on what you do with the file afterwards.

Not sure about that. Cracking DRM all by itself MAY be illegal in some places. Again, though, since I don't redistribute files, I have no worries.

Originally Posted by Quoth

Actually it's just EASIER to circumvent Amazon's DRM on non-KFX.

There has never ever been any DRM that can't be circumvented. It's essentially a stupid extra cost and inconvenience to ordinary law abiding people and no barrier to commercial piracy (illegal redistribution).

At some point in the past - when I was making my decisions - Apple's DRM hadn't been cracked and Amazon's had. Now it's just momentum. There is rarely a reason (IMHO) to buy a book from Apple over Amazon.

And, by buying all my books from Amazon -- I am saved from "re-buying" a book I've already bought. I used to do that quite often when I was buying paper books. I buy a book, don't get around to reading it.....or heck, sometimes I do read the book and forget and buy it again.

Anywhoo....I am content to be an Amazon ebook customer.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

There has never ever been any DRM that can't be circumvented.

This statement is wrong too.
Correct is: everything can be bypassed if the effort is worthwhile - however, deDRM research was not worthwhile for some versions and these are therefore not touchable.
For piracy, it is much easier to scan a printed book and turn it into an e-book.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

There has never ever been any DRM that can't be circumvented.

The new hardened DRM developed by Adobe has yet to be circumvented. That's because there are ways around not getting it like there are ways around not getting KFX from Amazon.

If this new Adobe DRM is forced on us, there is going to be holy hell as a lot of people will no longer be able to read their eBooks on the device(s) they've been using.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The new hardened DRM developed by Adobe has yet to be circumvented. That's because there are ways around not getting it like there are ways around not getting KFX from Amazon.

Readium DRM (CARE) cannot be broken either

[binaryhermit]

Both of those presumably haven't been broken *yet* because nobody really cares, if anyone with the skills to do so really cares enough to work on it, I suspect they'll be cracked fairly quickly.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

No, it's my attempt to make people understand it.

But if someone feels offended, that is solely his problem.

I also respond to statements, not to a user - I don't care about this guy.
And if it comes to similar statements, then there are also similar answers.

And to get back to the subject.

In my opinion, DRM removal is unethical if it is used to read on an second an unsuitable device.
In this case another license would have to be bought and if not, ...

And the thoughtless excuse regarding switching off the server! DRM removal can be done - if necessary - afterwards.

Ye gods. You're a classical example of "if I do it, it's ok, because my excuses are always valid. Other people doing the same thing are criminals and their excuses don't count.".

Your statements are so ludicrous they're not even funny anymore. You've lost all credibility in my eyes. I never thought I'd see such hypocrisy on MR, where most members are intelligent and reasonable people. But whatever. Go on, if it makes you feel better. I don't care.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Readium DRM (CARE) cannot be broken either

Never say never.