Solid State E-Books

[Bob Russell]

Originally Posted by NatCh

I think I'm just trying to keep the concept of a book as a discrete object, and trying to preserve the flexibility that it entails.

And that may not be possible, or even desirable.

I'm starting to see where you guys are coming from. Thanks.

As far as the book concept, I think you can do that today with eReader. with the exception that there are limits wrt giving the book away. You could pass on the book, and enter the code on the other person's pda or computer (it's your credit card used to buy the book, so you wouldn't want to actually give it to them in most cases). But if they have to reload the handheld from scratch or switch devices, they'd have to get the code again from you. And of course I don't know whether that kind of flexibility is intended by an eReader book sale.

So all you have to do is put one book per SD card right now. That becomes your library, and you pop the card in for the book you want to read. As long as you stick to authenticated devices (no limit, but they have to have your code entered), it's analagous a physical book. But you just aren't able to, say, sell it on eBay (nor would the Motricity folks be happy with that either). And you can't read it on devices that don't have eReader available on them, but a similar situation would occur with protected EBSD card books also. (Yes, I did catch that you made this up, KA, and it's a really handy way to refer to the idea in this thread where people likely know what we mean!)

The idea of limiting the EBSD card readers to dedicated devices seems interesting, but if you limited the ability to read the book so much that you can't read on the computer at all, that might be a bit limiting. And would the industry really support a new hardware standard at reasonable prices just for e-books? It would be a more expensive proposition, I would think, even if you could manufacture on the same equipment as regular SD cards, and just tweak it slightly. But with economies of scale, maybe. An intriguing idea, anyway.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

Off the bat we need standards, SD’s cards are a good start for the books; I think tying them to a physical card is crucial.

I understand what you are attempting with this idea, but tying an eBook to something physical makes eBooks less useful. Unless you can put several books on the card, you end up having to have several cards with you. While better than carrying paper books, it's far less useful than just carrying the reader.

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

Oh and the bulge would contain some circuits so if you tried the floppy hack it wouldn’t work. Now if the reader is DRM protected then it would be limited to just reading and not copying. This entire scheme however would depend upon cooperation of hardware makers not to make EBSD readers (or USB converters) outside of DRM protected e-book readers. This can be hacked but it would involve a bit of cutting and soldering so most people won’t do it.

So, other than make eBooks less useful, how is this better than software DRM?

I see no benefit here. You are still locking eBooks to a single solution controlled by a single group. Just like to make a DVD player, you have to get a CSS license, I see that in order to make a EBSD eBook reader, you need to get a license. Such a license may say that you will put defects into your eBook reader (just like CSS does for DVDs).

I just don't see how this solves anything other than reselling/giving away/trading eBooks. I certainly don't see how this will permit me to read an eBook 10 years from now.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by NatCh

At one point I considered the idea of embedding a microprocessor on the SD card (If they can cram 4GB in there an 8086 processor shouldn't be a challenge ). The processor would gatekeep the contents and only allow them out if it liked what the card was connected to. Maybe it would even serve up the information only in page-sized chunks.

Possible? Probably. Feasible?

Nope. I write a program to "read" the book from the card programatically and write it to a standard format file.

Protection gone.

[NatCh]

Actually I meant for the data to be behind the microprocessor, and the microprocessor's program would take a look at what it was connected to, and decide whether to open up or just shut down and stop talking or listening to anything until it's pulled & plugged again. One of the things that would make it clam up would be trying to access it progammatically.


I get that you're catagorically opposed to any and all DRM, rlauzon -- I even agree that we would be better off without it. I'm also getting the idea that you believe that there isn't any way that copy protection of any sort can work in a way that protects the content owner's rights as well as the customer's.

I just don't know nearly enough about the area to confidently reach that conclusion. There are simply too many possibilities for me to decline to examine them. I figure, who knows? Something might actually work.

I'm also pragmatic enough to accept that for the nonce we're going to have to deal with some sort of DRM, even if it's just to the extent of choosing not to read certain texts so that as to not support their DRM. All we're doing here is trying to generate ideas that might get us a better balance than we have now.

And since it's rather unlikely that we're actually going to come up with any solution (however perfect it might be) here that anyone who makes such decisions is going to jump on any time soon, I suppose what we're really doing is passing time until the electronic-reader device of our individual choice comes out and we can return quietly to our lairs and read in peace.

Now I'm off to the meditation thread.

[Kosst Amojan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

I just don't see how this solves anything other than reselling/giving away/trading eBooks. I certainly don't see how this will permit me to read an eBook 10 years from now.

Really it’s only the interface that has to stay the same. As a discrete device and as a practical limit, flash based cards WILL NOT get any smaller. And if we’re talking one book per card, transfer rates won’t matter much either. That’s not to say the cards and readers won’t evolve (video e-ink) but as the tech gets cheaper but the interface stays the same, making readers backwards compatible would be simple.

As for DRM again, yes we would end up with a license agreement like DVD’s. Why is that a problem? DVD’s are freaking successful and that’s what we want for e-books. No one is worried if they can play their DVD’s 10 years from now because we will. And none of this eliminates the possibility of future services to upgrade the tech.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

Really it’s only the interface that has to stay the same.

It makes no difference. In 10 years, SD cards will only be a memory and my eBooks won't be readable in the devices of 10 years from now.

You are basing your assumptions that the SD interface is still useful 10 years from now. How long did it take for CF cards to fall out of favor?

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

As for DRM again, yes we would end up with a license agreement like DVD’s. Why is that a problem?

Because, like DVDs, we end up with a single organization that can control how, what and where I can read.

Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan

DVD’s are freaking successful and that’s what we want for e-books. No one is worried if they can play their DVD’s 10 years from now because we will. And none of this eliminates the possibility of future services to upgrade the tech.

Really? I have several region 3 DVDs that I have to play in a special DVD player because CSS says that licensed DVD players must respect the (not law-based) "right" to control what country I can watch my DVDs in.

I am forced to wait until certain things are displayed after I put the DVD in my player. I am not allowed to fast forward, skip, etc., these things.

That's what the problem with DVDs is right now. Yes, it's successful - because it's a great improvement over video tapes - not because it's gives users what they want.

And, yes, 10 years from now, we may not be able to watch those DVDs (I highly doubt that they would do this, but...) if CSS refuses to license any more players and if they revoke the contracts of everyone who has a contract. As DVD players fail (and seeing how cheap they are, that'll happen in 5 years) you cannot get a player that will play your content.

One company can lock up all your content and not let you watch it.

[yvanleterrible]

A couple of ideas about the practicality of lugging around a collection of SD cards.

First instead of full size SD cards; Micro SD. I've got a couple, they're as small as a dime, one of mine is 1gb. They come with a piggyback that fits in any SD slot.

Second, all these cards could be fitted in pouches sown on the reader's carrying travel case.

Third an SD Jukebox could be created at about the size of a PDA to contain at least 50 plugged micro SD cards.

An other thing missing on the market as far as I know is a wire with a plug that would fit in an SD slot. That would aid to plug an SD Jukebox to an SD slot.

The market so far was built around the fact that for bigger content the cards you use have to be bigger. But if a quantity of locked cards is a factor, nothing today exists to cater to this need.

And worse WE DON'T GOT DAT D....D READER YET!!!

[BuddyBoy]

How about franked or branded ebook content? There is another word for it, but for the life of me I can't remember it. Basically have the owner's information included in the encrypted content so that it displays in key places throughout the book. Then allow the owner to download a fixed, but significant, number of copies over their lifetime in whichever ebook format is supported at that time. This does curtail the resale market a bit, but allows for loaning books to friends.

And it future-proofs things a bit, so that, unlike me, you don't have to keep your Gemstar reader around to read your Gemstar content.

[Bob Russell]

I think you're talking about digital watermarks. It sounds attractive on the surface, but content owners have stated that they don't want to use it, it might be possible to strip, and worst of all the loan scenario is probably not going to work. (I'm no expert on this, so maybe all these issues could be solved, but they sound like a problem for now.)

My main point,though, is that if you allow limited loaning, then a watermark doesn't help anything because one you allow loans to one person, how do you use watermarking to punish for what other people did with something after you gave it away. Hard to hold you responsible, or anyone resonsible for some widespread copying. I think it has to be either technology (e.g. a DRM like eREader or Sony's DRM that allows limited copies, but restricts platforms because of limited implementation and support), or it needs to be morals/legal/convenience based, so people just tend to buy more than they share.

I bet the average music listener with an mp3 collection has a % split of bought and copied music. But if we were all "thieves" bent on copying only, it would be a 90%copied/10%bought split of their copyrighted music. But I think (of the music they really listen to and consider a part of their collection), most people I know have a 80%buy/20%copy sort of split.

The recording industry says they have stolen 20% of the profits. But actually, they have spent hundreds or more likely thousands on music, and I'm pretty sure that if not for mp3's and even sharing, most of them would have bought much less music in total. But it's a tough thing to gauge because it probably also depends on which particular people you run into and have the opportunity to talk to.

Since I've drifted so far that I no longer remember what topic I'm writing about, I will just stop here! Besides, it's much later than I thought it was also.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

After following so many of the DRM-related threads on this site, I think it should be clear by now that DRM cannot do the job it is designed to do. This is the mistake of the music and publishing industries, trying to impose an unworkable solution to maintain their current business model. They are simply not accepting that the existence of electronic media demands a new business model, or they are actively working to slow down the creation/acceptance of the new model that they know must come.

There's simply nothing convenient about DRM, short- or long-term, whether it is hardware or software based, so I can't see it being a part of the new model. It would be like printing paper books on special paper that cannot be copied, or even viewed by anything other than the human eye with genetically-matching glasses! The paper industry knows better than to do this to prevent books being loaned or copied, and it will eventually be clear to them that en e-book analogue will be similarly useless.

As Bob just suggested, the new business model must have an acceptable cost/convenience factor to make it easier to buy the content than steal it. The model will surely change the dynamic of book production, sales, and profitability, which will surely be painful or mortal for existing paper-based publishers. They will either adopt, or perish, according to their innovative abilities, flexibility, or deep pockets. If that's not enough reason to delay the new model with DRM tactics, I don't know what would be.

So we can't be surprised that all of this smoke is being blown up our collective skirts. We can only continue to wait, and deal with the status quo as best we can, until it all blows away.

[slayda]

Steve & Bob have the right idea. Pirates exist to make money. There are two basic ways to fight them.

1. Make it difficult for them to work
2. Make it unprofitable for them to work

DRM is a way to make it difficult but like rlauzon keeps saying, if you build a lock, someone else can find a way to unlock it. We all realize here that that will not work in the long run.

A better way is to make it unprofitable.

- Laws are an attempt at that but in a world economy, sans a world government, that won't work.

- DRM lowers the profit for the pitate, i.e. they have to do more work to pirate something DRMed so their profit is less. But as already seen, that doesn't work.

- The only way it will work (and maybe this is wishful thinking) is to make ebooks cheap enough that the pirates profit is so low they will not go to the effort.

To a certain extent, this last alternative has already happened in the music industry with music brokers (e.g. Wal Mart) selling individual songs. With that mechanism you can buy, for e$0.88, just the songs you want instead of the CD bundle which, in my experience, has at least one song I hate & several that I don't particularly like. I buy the CD because of one or two songs I really like.

IMHO, reducing the pirates profit is the only workable solution.

[bingle]

Originally Posted by slayda

Steve & Bob have the right idea. Pirates exist to make money. There are two basic ways to fight them.

*blinks* I think that these days, most of the piracy content creators seem to be worried about is non-profit piracy - internet-based sharing, basically. DRM does nothing for commercial pirates, or even semi-dedicated hobbyists. It only prevents the most casual piracy.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by slayda

IMHO, reducing the pirates profit is the only workable solution.

Interesting theory, slayda, but I'm not sure that profit is what's driving this kind of "piracy."

I remember that when Harry Potter #6 came out, it was scanned, OCR'ed and posted in under 24 hours (like 12?). It was posted free, and cost a fair amount of effort but it was spread over a number of folks. Profit obviously didn't drive that, 'cause there wasn't any. So cutting out the profit wouldn't work there.

So what did drive it? I think part of it was bragging rights, those folks feel they can strut a bit because of being part of that. But part of it was also that there is a demand for e-versions of such books as HP. Part of it was also that folks wanted the book now, and didn't want to wait for their Barnes & Noble to release it at their local midnight, or in a month or so when it got to their country.

So here's a scenario, What if they had also released it as an e-book at the same time? Those desparate buyers would have never waited for someone to scan the rascal or break the DRM and post it, they'd've all crashed the servers at 12:00:01 GMT trying to buy it at the same time! Okay, add more server capacity, and viola, you can't sell out of copies, you have virtually no shipping costs for those copies, and you haven't lost a single sale to these "Robin Hood" style pirates.

I really think that a lot of e-book piracy just isn't driven by profit, because nobody seems to actually sell the pirated copies. However, I admit to not having tried very hard to find such copies, so I could just be totally unaware of a burgeoning black market in e-books all around me.

I would love to have the HP series electronicly, BTW, they'd be so much more comfortable to hold that way. I'd consider re-buying them in e-version, if they offered one and the prices were reasonable. But I don't suppose that Ms. Rowling or Scholastic, Inc. (the publisher) are enlightened enough to read MobileRead. (sigh)

I'm reluctantly coming to the opinion that DRM that isn't too onerous (whatever that means, but it has to include allowing reselling & giving away) is probably necessary. If it's just as easy to buy your own, reasonably priced copy as break the DRM, I think that most folks will buy a copy. That's why I came up with what yvanleterrible dubbed the "solid-state e-book" idea, in the first place, it could be a pretty solid DRM that didn't impact reselling or lending in the slightest. I'm not saying it's a perfect idea, just that it's an idea.

[Bob Russell]

I agree somewhat NatCh, although many people are not ready to give up on the idea that DRM can be gotten rid of completely. I think that the real key is what happens to copyright law. If content owners get the upper hand DRM will be onerous, as indicated by that government study about a year ago, which even went so far as to suggest that content owners should be able to control where and how content is used. The best hope is for an educated public to push an educated political body so they will not only be influenced by the united content contingencies. That's why libraries keep coming up... the extension of the current library role with paper to the electronic world requires a softening of DRM control and an increase in electronic fair use. Maybe that's something people can get behind.

Until then, we just have to hope for flexible DRM and support for common formats to be widespread.