People who want no DRM are impractical dreamers...

[vaughnmr]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Look , the success of Baen is a wonderful thing, but so long as its the ONLY significant success...

You must have forgot about O'Reilly, they are drm-free tech ebooks.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most publishers (and their authors) disagree with you. Why should I privilege your opinion over theirs?

How many have you asked? Must publishers and authors I have met or heard talk at science fiction conventions agree with pdurrant.

[OtterBooks]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

[*]We have a plethora of data showing that DRM has a significant negative impact on honest, paying customers.[/LIST]

I haven't seen any such data, but I'm open to its existence. The only accounts of DRM hindrance I've heard come from people who own multiple ereader platforms, a minority of enthusiasts I've only witnessed on these forums, many of whom generally strip DRM anyway. Hindrance for them: zero, aside from the seconds involved in DRM removal. For every ereader consumer I know personally, their behavior involves a single device used to read a book and be done with it. Hindrance for them: nil.

I asked my mother if she felt limited by DRM restrictions on her ebooks. Her response: "The what?"

[tompe]

Originally Posted by OtterBooks

I haven't seen any such data, but I'm open to its existence.

A lot of examples have been given in this thread. For example all the people that lost access to bought pdf files when Adobes stopped supporting them.

[Piper_]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Mobile Read devotees really ARE the cognoscenti and that you are being anoyed and angered by things that the ordinary ebook reader isn't even aware of.

Yet. Wait until they switch devices or want to buy from another store. Not to mention want to share with someone, including their own spouse, if s/he doesn't use the same device or account.

It's just not honorable to pretend that "what the ignorant don't know about DRM won't hurt them."

It's also not honorable to keep trying to marginalize those who have recognized the actual problems (from experience or research) as loons of the "cognoscenti" or "digirati."

The BHPs demonstrate their own blindness (at best) by persisting in practices, assumptions, and arguments that are personally and intellectually insulting to their customers.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I just put Girl with the Dragoon Tattoo into a Google search box and went 5 pages down without finding aan illegal book site.

Did you try it with the word "ebook?" I got two hits for unauthorized free download sites on the first page of results.

What you kind of seem to be saying is that authors and publishers shouldn't even try to use the limited tools available to secure their rights, if there is a chance that their efforts might inconvenience some consumer somewhere. Needless to say, that's not the standard with any physical product.

They're welcome to use any tools they like.

And I'm free to shop from someone else.

I'm not saying publishers are evil (although I think some of them are rather vile); I'm saying they're using an increasingly-flawed business model. I'm not required to feed their paranoia by agreeing that they'll fail if they ... allow me to use what I buy like Baen, Samhain and Smashwords do.

Radio Shack storeowners lock up their Ipods beyond the counter. That's inconvenient to me and any potential buyer.

But I'm not required to go through their locks *after* I buy. The issue isn't how much control they have over their products before purchase; it's about how I'm allowed to use it after I give them money.

Sure in a perfect world, we could say "Trust the consumer not to be a jerk about large scale sharing" . BUt I don't know if I would bet MY livelihood on consumers not being such jerks.

Baen does. O'Reilly does--and their customers are digirati geeks. JA Konrath does. Joshua Graham does. Amanda Hocking does.

Not everyone who's bet on "the customers aren't jerks" is making a good living. But then, not everyone who hasn't, is making a good living either.

The issue isn't whether it's possible to make a living without DRM. Obviously, it is. The issue is whether DRM makes it easier to make a living at writing. Got any evidence to support that?

I guess I'm unwilling to ask publishers and authors to bet THEIR livelihoods. If it turns out wrong, you'll just say "Oops!" and move on. They won't have that option.

I'm not asking them to bet anything. I'm pointing out that until they change their business model, I'm buying from the competition.

They need to take a long, hard look at how many sales DRM causes, by preventing easy free downloads, vs how many it loses by annoying customers. Especially since that second category never gets smaller.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by OtterBooks

I haven't seen any such data, but I'm open to its existence. The only accounts of DRM hindrance I've heard come from people who own multiple ereader platforms, a minority of enthusiasts I've only witnessed on these forums, many of whom generally strip DRM anyway. Hindrance for them: zero, aside from the seconds involved in DRM removal. For every ereader consumer I know personally, their behavior involves a single device used to read a book and be done with it. Hindrance for them: nil.

I asked my mother if she felt limited by DRM restrictions on her ebooks. Her response: "The what?"

DRM issues certainly have hurt large numbers of people in the past, and are likely to hurt many, many more in the future. Any time a store that uses DRM shuts down, customers get hurt. What about people who bought ebooks from Amazon prior to the Kindle launch? (yes, Amazon sold DRMed ebooks before the Kindle, and then they shut that down, screwing everybody who hadn't liberated their books) What about people who bought music from MSN Music or any of the other PlaysForSure providers when Microsoft shut down PlaysForSure in favor of Zune? Borders is on the brink of death and Barnes & Noble isn't far behind. What's going to happen to ebook customers of theirs when they go away. Even if you're an Amazon or Apple customer, you're not safe. Amazon has already proven that directly, as has Microsoft (twice! when they killed support for their .lit format and stores using that shut down). You're not safe even buying from the big guys.

Of course, today if you buy music from Apple or Microsoft you're getting DRM-free mp3s so if they ever shut down their services you're not left out in the cold. Maybe what the industry really needs is a high profile store shutdown. There have been plenty of smaller stores who've shut down and screwed their customers, but maybe if B&N dies and takes Nook with it people will finally get the point.

[Piper_]

Originally Posted by tompe

A lot of examples have been given in this thread. For example all the people that lost access to bought pdf files when Adobes stopped supporting them.

And Mobipocket, and others.

I don't think the problem of owning multiple platforms should be blown off as if it's a minor problem, either, either because it's a problem only of enthusiasts (not true at all).

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by Piper_

And Mobipocket, and others.

I don't think the problem of owning multiple platforms should be blown off as if it's a minor problem, either, either because it's a problem only of enthusiasts (not true at all).

It's a problem that can affect anyone who replaces a device - even with the same make and model. I don't think there are many members here who haven't lost purchased books to DRM.

We're biased because we've been bitten.

We learned to circumvent DRM because we've been ripped off by it.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by toddos

So really the question is not, "Why shouldn't publishers stop using DRM?" but instead, "Why should publishers continue to use DRM when all of the evidence proves that it's more harmful than helpful?"

They shouldn't, yet they still do.

What is an interesting question is does it pay off? Are the extra sales generated when DRM inconveniences a poor soul who does not know (or does not wish to) get around it really outweighing the benefits of DRM-free model?

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Er, no I don't. I think its at best a necessary evil. Its you lot who are convinced that it is the spawn of Satan and can't possibly be justified, no matter what. I note that neither you or anyone else has proposed a solution, except by saying "It won't be that bad." This is unconvincing . A look at falling music industry revenues shows it can be that bad.

At some point, buying music online, the drm just say "no". So i goes to the fnac, grab the Cd, look at the price "mmm, what ? 20 euros, i guess i can live without that."
I hardly bought music.
Now, i can buy mp3 album for 10 euros, have a spotify premiun account.

Why are DRM a problem ? I'm a linux user. Trying to read protected content with linux is a pain at best, is not impossible.
Second senario : i went from mobipocket to ePub. Lucky i could de-drm my book, and keep them.
Me, as a buyer, don't want to mess with activation, authorization and all that. I want to read, that just it.
I also got screwed by ade once, result being two totally useless book i had to repay...

I feel safe buying e-books because I can de-drm. If not, i would go to paper book, or the darknet.

[Piper_]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

It's a problem that can affect anyone who replaces a device - even with the same make and model. I don't think there are many members here who haven't lost purchased books to DRM.

We're biased because we've been bitten.

We learned to circumvent DRM because we've been ripped off by it.

Exactly.

(I'm impressed that you were able to make any sense at all out of my crazy sentence, btw.

Note to self: when editing or deleting half of a sentence, check that the remaining half is coherent. )

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most publishers (and their authors) disagree with you. Why should I privilege your opinion over theirs?

I'm surprised these publishers disagree that DRM has a cost because Adobe are fairly open about their prices.

Adobe Content Server 4 is available for the initial fee of $6500, with no limits on the amount of content you can protect and distribute or on the number of CPUs on which you can install the server. The initial fee includes the server software, the first year of access to the Adobe digital signing service, and maintenance, support and upgrades as provided for by the License Terms and Conditions for Content Server 4.

Adobe digital signing service fee
The initial fee also includes a one-year service plan that enables you to access Adobe’s digital signing service as well as receive Adobe Content Server software upgrades, maintenance and support as provided for by the License Terms and Conditions. Customers are required to renew this service plan every year for $1500.

Transactional fee
In addition to the initial fee and signing service plan, Content Server customers are charged a small fee per transaction. Whenever you sell or loan content, a request is made from Adobe Content Server 4 to an Adobe License Service for a digitally signed license. Once signed and returned to your server, the license and protected PDF or EPUB file are available to your customer.

Whenever a transaction is signed, a small license fee is charged to your account. The amount depends on the type of license you select, of which there are two types:

A permanent license gives the user access to the signed content forever. For each permanent license, you are charged $.22.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by Ankh

They shouldn't, yet they still do.

What is an interesting question is does it pay off? Are the extra sales generated when DRM inconveniences a poor soul who does not know (or does not wish to) get around it really outweighing the benefits of DRM-free model?

The only real benefit from DRM goes to stores, not to authors or publishers - and that's because it facilitates vendor lock-in. It's a disincentive to switch to a new brand when you change devices because it's going to be more work to shift the books in your library you still want to read.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I just put Girl with the Dragoon Tattoo into a Google search box and went 5 pages down without finding aan illegal book site.

It helps enormously if you spell it correctly ...

What you kind of seem to be saying is that authors and publishers shouldn't even try to use the limited tools available to secure their rights, if there is a chance that their efforts might inconvenience some consumer somewhere.

They shouldn't be employing methods that really don't do anything but pissing off their legitimate customers, yes. The "all customers will be searched upon leaving the premises" example is a good comparison: even if it did deter shoplifting to some degree it's not something I'd be prepared to put up with. DRM is even less effective.