DRM Good or Bad?

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

No, because I wouldn't read that rubbish.

There you go. I thought it was an opera

Helen

[frahse]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Sorry to respond late.
From your post I got the impression that you had evidence that it (DRM)doesn't work. Evidence based on more than opinions, surmises or likes and dislikes.


I agree that DRM does not stop piracy. Probably does not even slow it down a smidge. Book piracy has been pretty common for a long time, long before the internet was commonly used.

I do think it slows down casual file sharing between strangers.

My evidence is no more concrete than yours. It is based on the amount of people who complain about DRM in a bitter manner (not yourself, but those who refer to it as a disease or infestation when it is clearly not either as it doesn't spread from one book to the next) or feel that it infringes their traditional rights/priveledges with paper books.

For example:
You cannot resell an ebook:
I have heard that some stores will buy back ebooks at a better price percenatge than used book stores? And in many communities their are no used book stores so not a right really.

You cannot let your family read your book:
Of course you can, just trade readers for a bit. I do it with my mother all the time.

You cannot read it on another device:
Well that is just silly as you can read Amazon/Adobe DRM books/etc. on most tablets, PCs and pretty well any ereader that can be rooted. And you don't have to chop of their spines and scan them.

As I said before, I do not think DRM enhances sales in that many people say this book has no DRM so I will not buy it, but I think that the percentage of people put off by DRM is pretty low in the general population. And most will buy it anyway if it is what they want.

Helen

Well said.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

There you go. I thought it was an opera

Helen

I don't think this Nemo is the Captain Nemo that played the great organ so well down in the depths of the sea. His picture is indicative of a child.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Sorry to respond late.
From your post I got the impression that you had evidence that it (DRM)doesn't work. Evidence based on more than opinions, surmises or likes and dislikes.

I do. I listed it. You quoted it. Refusing to accept it doesn't make it less real.

I do think it slows down casual file sharing between strangers.

My evidence is no more concrete than yours. It is based on the amount of people who complain about DRM in a bitter manner

How on Earth do you see that as evidence that it slows down casual sharing?!?
The complaints are 1) about using the ebooks for what people consider non-infringing uses, not copyright-infringing sharing, and 2) mostly from folks here who know how to strip and would not be stopped for second if they wanted to share, but merely want the system changed for reader's benefit.

Do you have any evidence that DRM stopped a single casual share? I, too, presume it must have somewhere but I see no evidence of it.
I do see direct evidence that it has failed to stop it in many cases.

Sure seems like flimsy defense of using it.

(not yourself, but those who refer to it as a disease or infestation when it is clearly not either as it doesn't spread from one book to the next) or feel that it infringes their traditional rights/priveledges with paper books.
For example:
You cannot resell an ebook:
I have heard that some stores will buy back ebooks at a better price percenatge than used book stores? And in many communities their are no used book stores so not a right really.

You cannot let your family read your book:
Of course you can, just trade readers for a bit. I do it with my mother all the time.

You cannot read it on another device:
Well that is just silly as you can read Amazon/Adobe DRM books/etc. on most tablets, PCs and pretty well any ereader that can be rooted. And you don't have to chop of their spines and scan them.

None of that is evidence that DRM slows down sharing and I'm not sure how it's relevant in this context.

As I said before, I do not think DRM enhances sales in that many people say this book has no DRM so I will not buy it, but I think that the percentage of people put off by DRM is pretty low in the general population. And most will buy it anyway if it is what they want.

So it doesn't help, and turns some people off. Why on Earth use it?
QED.

ApK

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by ApK

Do you have any evidence that DRM stopped a single casual share? I, too, presume it must have somewhere but I see no evidence of it.
I do see direct evidence that it has failed to stop it in many cases.

I have plenty of anecdotal evidence that DRM stops some casual sharing, and from enough different types of consumers that I have no problem believing that yes, many people would like to share ebooks but are dissuaded by the minor technical bump it would take. If they *really* wanted to share, they'd manage it; they don't think it's particularly important. (They're much more annoyed that they can't read their Kindle books on their new Nook.)

What I don't have (and what the publishers refuse to gather data for) is how many future purchases are prevented by the loss of that casual sharing. Few people discover their favorite authors by buying one of that author's books new.

There is evidence that DRM leads to less sharing. There is no evidence that DRM leads to *more sales.*

I am endlessly baffled at the number of authors who apparently don't want their books read.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by frahse

I don't think this Nemo is the Captain Nemo that played the great organ so well down in the depths of the sea. His picture is indicative of a child.

You leave my organ out of this and get back to your wanderings. But you are getting close.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

There you go. I thought it was an opera

Helen

Sorry, my subtle facetiousness went over your head too.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

What I don't have (and what the publishers refuse to gather data for) is how many future purchases are prevented by the loss of that casual sharing. Few people discover their favorite authors by buying one of that author's books new.

There is evidence that DRM leads to less sharing. There is no evidence that DRM leads to *more sales.*

I am endlessly baffled at the number of authors who apparently don't want their books read.

Surely logic must prove this to be true. I suppose you can lead a horse to a kindle, but you can't make him rail against the machine.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

Sorry, my subtle facetiousness went over your head too.

Sorry, just took it as said and still to thick to see the subtle facetiousness of it Some days I just don't get subtle

Helen

[gmw]

You can save yourself the trouble of typing up a reply to this thread by following this link. The result will be the same, but less atoms will be disturbed by your enthusiasm.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by ApK

I do. I listed it. You quoted it. Refusing to accept it doesn't make it less real.


How on Earth do you see that as evidence that it slows down casual sharing?!?
The complaints are 1) about using the ebooks for what people consider non-infringing uses, not copyright-infringing sharing, and 2) mostly from folks here who know how to strip and would not be stopped for second if they wanted to share, but merely want the system changed for reader's benefit.

Do you have any evidence that DRM stopped a single casual share? I, too, presume it must have somewhere but I see no evidence of it.
I do see direct evidence that it has failed to stop it in many cases.

Sure seems like flimsy defense of using it.


None of that is evidence that DRM slows down sharing and I'm not sure how it's relevant in this context.


So it doesn't help, and turns some people off. Why on Earth use it?
QED.

ApK

Is this the evidence that DRM DOESN'T work?

Evidence that it doesn't work exists in the form of all the pirated copies of DRM protected books, which are easy to find.
Also in the existence of stripped books for non-infringing uses like backup or space shifting.
Also in the existence of people who refuse to buy DRMed books.

I see it as evidence tha DRM doesn't always work which I cannot argue. I don't see it as evidence that DRM DOESN'T work. (I read the caps in your original post as a statement that it serves little or no purpose whatever)

Stripped books for backup is perhaps a small benefit of DRM in that it gives some people something to feel important about. And personally I see nothing wrong with stripping for personal use. You can strip it, you can format shift it, you can even print it. Perhaps it is one of the many ways ebooks are superior to pbooks.

But... because many people can strip DRM within 10-30 minutes of having their first DRMed ebook doesnt mean that the majority will even make the effort. Surprisingly even those that can will often not bother.

And the existence of people who refuse to buy DRMed ebooks does not seem to have noticably slowed down growth of sales. Some people refuse to buy meat for personal reasons, some people refuse to pay taxes, some people won't use computers, some people would rather die than have an operation/blood transfusion etc etc.

Extremists abound in many areas and some of them get over it and some don't. Because someone (or even 10,000 someones) won't buy a DRMed ebook is hardly evidence that it doesn't work.

The existence of opposing opinions/beliefs and boycotts of products based on these opinions/beliefs is not evidence that it(DRM, democracy, factory farming, antibiotics etc.) don't work. We may hate one or all of them but they seem to chug along despite our opinions/beliefs.


Show me a few non DRM using publishers who are making significant growth in the market percentage-wise (not expecting them to overtake or do better, just same rate of growth) or even big drops in sales of DRMed ebooks, that would be evidence.

To say that DRM doesn't work because it does not decrease or slow down piracy is to assume that most people are pirates which I do not believe to be the case.

I agree that DRM does not decrease piracy. I know that DRMed books are pirated and probably more than non DRMed books. But.. most best seller/popular books are sold with DRM. The piracy market is driven by both popularity and obscurity. Popular books are more often than not sold with DRM. Obscure books have to be hunted down and scanned etc. Obviously popular books will appear first just as they did before ebooks.

Probably I am missing the real evidence in your post? Sorry for going on like a rabid dog but sometimes I get stuck between a rock and a crazy place.

Helen

[ApK]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

a rock and a crazy place.

I'm trying to decide which of those is this thread.
Both seem applicable.

[VydorScope]

(src http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/04/tor...to-go-drm-free )

“Our authors and readers have been asking for this for a long time,” said president and publisher Tom Doherty. “They’re a technically sophisticated bunch, and DRM is a constant annoyance to them. It prevents them from using legitimately-purchased e-books in perfectly legal ways, like moving them from one kind of e-reader to another.”

So at least one publisher is feeling pressure from AUTHORS and READERS on this.

[VydorScope]

Long but good article on this from a successful author (As Frahse asked...)


http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog...nd-ebooks.html


Some highlights...
(any bold face is my addition)

I will confess to a personal bias here, but I'd love it if Tor was allowed to sell my novels unencumbered by DRM -- I could personally use that as a strong marketing angle. (Like many younger writers, my major point of contact with my readers is my blog — I typically get 12-14,000 readers per day, and provide them with a community for discussing my work and asking me questions — based on direct feedback I'm fairly certain that dropping DRM would allow me to generate additional ebook sales and point my readers at a more diverse range of retailers.)

To the extent that piracy is an issue, I think the horse is well and truly out of the stable and over the horizon; bolting the stable door and adding chains and padlocks hasn't worked to date, either in print publishing or in music and film publishing. However, I would recommend considering a switch to watermarking. Watermarking doesn't prevent copying, but makes the original source of a copied file easy to find, which is a deterrent to piracy. This appears to be the current best practice in the music industry (in the iTunes store, all music downloads are watermarked), and they're a few years further into the era of internet distribution than we are.

Dropping DRM is probably not going to have a significant effect on the bestsellers, but I will note that J. K. Rowling's move into ebook territory is DRM free; presumably the rampant levels of piracy around her work was seen as a pre-existing condition, and anything that might convert pirate readers into paying customers was seen as giving Pottermore an edge.

I also like his thoughts on how DRM is limiting competition in retailers. Do read his full argument.... it is worth your time. IMO.

[frahse]

Sometimes I get tired of arguing, but that doesn't mean I am going to change my mind and agree that DRM in general is bad. Just means I might be quieter.

One point that keeps getting stepped on is about how Authors can or can't opt out of DRM. I keep hearing "well the authors don't like it either." Of course if the author has signed an agreement to have DRM on a book, then he is bound by that agreement, but on other books, he can do what he wishes.

My point is that an author can sell an eBook in a myriad of ways without DRM. All he has to do is choose to.

I choose to have DRM, though I might make an exception on a series to reach some new readers. That is what marketing and advertising is all about.