Publishers vs. Libraries: An E-Book Tug of War

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

And then perhaps you just might have noticed that the statement I had made in response that if one respected said author's one-copy-per-reader-please license statement included in the very text of her book being sold on Amazon, then one would be shelling out the $5.98 on Amazon as well, and not just the hypothetical just $2.99 with DRM versus the $5.98 with no DRM at Smashwords.

And thus no savings and not just the posited price premium of SW vs. Amazon shopping, but DRM on both your Amazon purchases as well, which would not be the case if you had bought your two copies at Smashwords.

It really doesn't matter whether SW has DRM or not. You aren't permitted (per the T&C) to copy files to another device, format shift or place a backup in Dropbox. If you decide to switch from Sony to Kindle you can redownload the mobi from SW. I have all this confirmed in writing from SW. Some time ago I read their T&C and thought they were silly but no the nice CS woman said it's all part of their "honor" system.

Since the publishers set the device limit way back when they must have realized (or were told) multiple people will share an Amazon account or Adobe computer. It doesn't necessarily mean 6 people will read every ebook but it's possible. Husband & wife, mother & daughter, parent & child are the most likely scenarios. After all, how would a child obtain any Amazon ebooks for their Kindles?

In any case, I don't want people to think that buying from SW and FW doesn't have its own restrictions if you follow their T&C. Of course, we all have the option to decline shopping at SW, Amazon, Kobo, etc if we object to the Content Providers and retailers terms.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

So multiple people don't count as the prohibited "any third party" one "may not" "distribute, sublicense, or otherwise assign" to because it's "solely for your personal use"?

This is an agreement between you and Amazon Digital Services, Inc.

Define "you" in respect to the laws of Washington State.

Define "third party" in respect to the laws of Washington State.

Again, how would a parent purchase a comic book for their child's Kindle Fire?

[JSWolf]

I don't think Amazon's TOS is actually legal. I've never read it. I was never presented it for reading and I've never agreed to it. Yet I have eBooks from Amazon (free ones). So how can they enforce it when I have never actually agreed?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Again, how would a parent purchase a comic book for their child's Kindle Fire?

Gifting.

[ATDrake]

Originally Posted by Fbone

It really doesn't matter whether SW has DRM or not. You aren't permitted (per the T&C) to copy files to another device, format shift or place a backup in Dropbox. If you decide to switch from Sony to Kindle you can redownload the mobi from SW. I have all this confirmed in writing from SW. Some time ago I read their T&C and thought they were silly but no the nice CS woman said it's all part of their "honor" system.

Smashwords' "honour system" may explicitly prohibit backup Dropboxing, silly as that is, but Amazon's T&C also explicitly prohibits DRM-stripping, which makes the reverse Kindle-to-Sony conversion hypothetically more iffy.

Not to mention, plenty of publishers include a boilerplate after the copyright saying "no part of this book may be yadda yadda including information storage and retrieval systems" etc.

I have this even on an e-book-only exclusive short story collection that's DRM-free from Kobo, and bit right after that acknowledges it's an e-book.

So, trade-off either way if you want to follow the letter of the agreements.

Originally Posted by Fbone

In any case, I don't want people to think that buying from SW and FW doesn't have its own restrictions if you follow their T&C. Of course, we all have the option to decline shopping at SW, Amazon, Kobo, etc if we object to the Content Providers and retailers terms.

We're agreed on these points.

The thing I was really mentioning beyond that is that even with Amazon's ability to extra-device-load, some content providers may additionally explicitly request a purchase-1-copy-per-reader-please, so it's not an automatic given that an Amazon purchase* includes a license to "share".

When able, it's up to the purchaser to decide what to do and where to get the book from according to what they think best fits their personal ethical choices and common sense, which is what I've been saying (and doing) all along.

[ATDrake]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Define "you" in respect to the laws of Washington State.

Define "third party" in respect to the laws of Washington State.

One could quibble over exactly where the line between "you" (singular/dual/multiple, whatever) and "third party" (people who are not you singular/dual/multiple whatever) lies.

Frankly the language seems ambiguous and non-intuitive to the end-customer to whom the T&C applies (although most Amazon shopping accounts seem to be for a single individual rather than some sort of joint corporate shopping thing).

Smashwords may spell stuff out more explicitly on a one-to-one basis, and you could argue either way what Amazon really means with what they say but I rather doubt that "you" will really cover "and those close friends of 'yours' who load up 'your' purchased books" in a court of law.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think Amazon's TOS is actually legal. I've never read it. I was never presented it for reading and I've never agreed to it. Yet I have eBooks from Amazon (free ones). So how can they enforce it when I have never actually agreed?

Weren't deliberately-scare-tactic software EULAs and the like ruled less-than-validly-legally-constraining because nobody ever read or understood them?

ETA: and also because they were using ridiculous legally non-enforceable language as part of said scare tactics.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

Weren't deliberately-scare-tactic software EULAs and the like ruled less-than-validly-legally-constraining because nobody ever read or understood them?

That was because you could not read the EULA without opening the packaging and then you could not return the software if you disagreed. Now you can read the EULA before the packaging is open.

[spindlegirl]

I have noticed all day I have been attempting to go to my library's website to borrow e-books and it has been about the slowest I've ever seen in the 8 months I have had e-readers....

Seems like many people got e-readers for Christmas and headed straight for the library?

I did manage to download one available book for borrowing, will entertain me for a few days.

[ATDrake]

In reply to JSWolf; sorry, hard to properly quote on the mobile site when typing from device:

Thanks, that explains it.

Perhaps Amazon's argument might be that you had to agree to the TOS when signing up for a shopping account (if new user) or d/l and install K4app or purchasing and registering a device.

But they couldn't really enforce it unless you made some sort of spectacularly public example of flouting the TOS and then they could try and seek punitive damages like those **AA cases or just shut down your account like that thread we had in General Discussions a while ago.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

I have noticed all day I have been attempting to go to my library's website to borrow e-books and it has been about the slowest I've ever seen in the 8 months I have had e-readers....

Seems like many people got e-readers for Christmas and headed straight for the library?

I did manage to download one available book for borrowing, will entertain me for a few days.

Seems so. I've had two local libraries be slow today.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

In reply to JSWolf; sorry, hard to properly quote on the mobile site when typing from device:

Thanks, that explains it.

Perhaps Amazon's argument might be that you had to agree to the TOS when signing up for a shopping account (if new user) or d/l and install K4app or purchasing and registering a device.

But they couldn't really enforce it unless you made some sort of spectacularly public example of flouting the TOS and then they could try and seek punitive damages like those **AA cases or just shut down your account like that thread we had in General Discussions a while ago.

I've had my Amazon account before eink readers existed. So any TOS I may have had to agree to back then wasn't relevant to eBooks sold by Amazon.

[ATDrake]

ISTR getting the occasional Amazon email update saying "our user ageement has changed, here's a link to the new one if you want to see what's changed" or words to that effect?

But yeah, there's kind of a problematic implied consent issue if that's the case.

It may be annoying when Apple does this entire pop-up and scroll down and check to agree or no more iTunes Store 4 U thing whenever they update the TOS.

But I can't say they don't make sure I know when something has changed, even if I don't read exactly what, and the even offer a PDF download link too.

[JSWolf]

Don't forget that Penguin is currently not allowing new eBooks to be borrowed via Overdrive. This started not long after Penguin's eBooks were borrowable from Amazon. I do think there is bad blood between Penguin and Amazon.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think Amazon's TOS is actually legal. I've never read it.

Yeah, you're not biased.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I was never presented it for reading and I've never agreed to it. Yet I have eBooks from Amazon (free ones). So how can they enforce it when I have never actually agreed?

You agreed to it when you got your account, bought items (yes, the free items are treated as purchases), or just by browsing their site. At the bottom of the page is a "conditions of use" link.

This is typical; Smashwords and Sony have "terms of service" that perform the exact same function.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Yeah, you're not biased.



You agreed to it when you got your account, bought items (yes, the free items are treated as purchases), or just by browsing their site. At the bottom of the page is a "conditions of use" link.

This is typical; Smashwords and Sony have "terms of service" that perform the exact same function.

Has nothing to do with a bias. I've not agreed to the TOS and yet I am allowed to purchase eBooks. If I don't agree, then it's not binding. Try this, install iTunes and if you do not agree to Apple's TOS, you cannot purchase anything using iTunes. But because Amazon did not make me ever agree to their TOS, it can't be legally binding.