DRM removal or piracy?

[kennyc]

Like everything else this is skirting the edges of legality and ethics and MR has it's own opinions right or wrong as does everyone else....as they say:

Your Mileage May Vary.

[Rbneader]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

This discussion is interesting because first of all, everyone seems to be on the same side: using tools to circumvent license checks with the goal to pirate content is wrong (both legally and morally) and should not be encouraged.

The question appears to be, should it be allowed to name such a tool without regard to its very nature? There are two aspects to answer this. One is the legal aspect. Unless someone could prove me wrong, I'm convinced that naming the tool is not a crime. Skim through today's IT news and you'll see plenty of references to specific hacking and cracking tools and methods that were used to hack a target. If there was a law against naming such tools, mainstream news coverage would look different.

Then there is the moral aspect. We don't want to encourage our visitors to pirate content. One could claim that just by naming a tool you'd passively assist a user in pirating content or software. That would assume that we are somehow the authority on the Net and that there are no alternatives to finding the information. Obviously, we are not the authority. I maintain that someone who wanted to find out more about how to break a license scheme is not going to visit MobileRead; rather he'd go to other communities and platforms (starting off with a Google Search). In fact I am convinced that the vast majority of our users is not interested in active piracy (other than to discuss the theoratical aspects of it).

Is it immoral to just mention the name of a tool whose sole reason for existence is to circumvent license checks? The answer depends on your values, and since we are an international bunch with different backgrounds, our values will undoubtly differ. I hesitate to make general community-wide decisions/guidelines based on my own moral judgement; instead I prefer to decide case-by-case. In this very case, it's not just the question whether mentioning an Android cracking tool is in accordance with our guidelines. It should also be considered that it was mentioned in a forum section that is dedicated to the support of a specific Android app, developed by a fellow MobileRead member, that can be cracked with the aforementioned tool. So there is a correlation and I think in this light for this specific case, it should be possible to find a common understanding that cracking tools ought not to be mentioned.

To me, this app seems exactly the same as Alf's tools. If I buy something, I don't want it phoning home and refusing to work unless it can connect to a server somewhere. I buy non-DRM'd software for my PC, but for my phone I often don't have that choice. Apps like this would let me use a much greater range of software, just like Alf's tools let me read books from a much greater range of stores.

The argument that it makes pirating apps easier but Alf's tool don't is completely illogical. Of course Alf's tools make pirating ebooks easier. And of course there are many, many avenues to get books illegally if we choose. But we don't, because we're decent people who pay for what we buy. I'm not sure why in one instance MR seems to feel that MR members are reasonable adults and in the other instance that they're greedy thieves.

Cracking tools are cracking tools. They both facilitate the same behavior, and trying to claim otherwise simply based on content seems very silly.

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by Rbneader

To me, this app seems exactly the same as Alf's tools. If I buy something, I don't want it phoning home and refusing to work unless it can connect to a server somewhere.

The cracking app doesn't prevent apps from "phoning home". What it does is hook between the app and the Google licensing API service to pretend that the app was purchased.

The argument that it makes pirating apps easier but Alf's tool don't is completely illogical. Of course Alf's tools make pirating ebooks easier. And of course there are many, many avenues to get books illegally if we choose.

Since you quoted me I assume you referred to my post? I didn't say that Alf's tools wouldn make piracy not easier. In the post you quoted, what I said applies to Alf's tools as well: If you're using the latter with the goal to pirate content, it's wrong (both legally and morally) and should not be encouraged here at MobileRead. What you do with the tools available and when you use them is entirely your decision.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by cybmole

As for Alf, the tools can't distinguish bought from borrowed, or detect the smarter, lazier thief who is exploiting kindle's change your mind and request no quibble refund loophole. I guess the tools are very popular with poor college students wanting expensive text books which can be loaned

That is when Amazon notices that you have a pretty good track record of buying and returning books.

Considering you can keep them without DeDRMing at all, just do a bog-standard file-copy and reinstate the book after Amazon deletes the book...

Anyway, yes Amazon is on the lookout for habitual no-questions-asked-returners-of-purchases.

Originally Posted by cybmole

Kindle prime , however, mostly uses a different DRM that is immune to tools, so I have to read those in the native kindle fire reader. No big deal as I''m unlikely to renew prime at current prices, when my year runs out.

I think you will find the difference is that the tools cannot DeDRM Kindle app books at all... that is, unless you use an altogether-more-complicated method of getting the app to show you the PID to enter in the DeDRM configuration. I believe there are details in the comments on Alf's blog.

Kindle Owners Lending Library, of course, only works with actual Kindle devices. Someone who usually DeDRMs using Kindle for PC might be unaware of that fact. Anyway, if you can DeDRM a library loan using an E-Ink Kindle (illegal an immoral though it is) then there is no difference on a technical level between that and DeDRMing a KOLL loan

[cybmole]

all you say is correct, as usual. I recently goggled the amazon kindle books return policy, thinking you had somethig like 15 minutes to say whoops i did not mean to by that, but you have a mind boggling 7 days- enough to read war & peace if you get a move on
so there was once a petition started by some author to get that changed, but it did not succeed.
Its inconsistent because if you order an app or a movie then " all sales are final" - you might get your money back on a movie if they detect that you have not watched it, but it's not guaranteed, and if you watch if first & then ask, you have no chance.
As for habitual returners, if I were planning to rip off all the text books needed for a college education I'd cycle through a bunch of throw away amazon accounts- I was thinking more about other schemes which I have seen references to but do not have the details of, which are specifically for course book loans - probably PDF tomes.
I have read that amazon clamp down hard mostly on folks buying & returning expensive electronics e.g. buy a bunch of cameras, keep only the one you like best/ I get twitchy anytime I need to return anything, & usually buy even more stuff to keep my ratio in good shape

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by Rbneader

To me, this app seems exactly the same as Alf's tools. If I buy something, I don't want it phoning home and refusing to work unless it can connect to a server somewhere. I buy non-DRM'd software for my PC, but for my phone I often don't have that choice. Apps like this would let me use a much greater range of software, just like Alf's tools let me read books from a much greater range of stores.

The argument that it makes pirating apps easier but Alf's tool don't is completely illogical. Of course Alf's tools make pirating ebooks easier. And of course there are many, many avenues to get books illegally if we choose. But we don't, because we're decent people who pay for what we buy. I'm not sure why in one instance MR seems to feel that MR members are reasonable adults and in the other instance that they're greedy thieves.

Cracking tools are cracking tools. They both facilitate the same behavior, and trying to claim otherwise simply based on content seems very silly.

I'm with you on the "I don't want my paid app to phone home". It's a must have for me, using my phone in the metro without data.
But in such situation I don't pirate it. I tell the developer what I think about that, hoping he will fix it. If not -> uninstall.

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by Rbneader

Cracking tools are cracking tools. They both facilitate the same behaviour, and trying to claim otherwise simply based on content seems very silly.

So you're for banning firearms in the hands of citizens, I think. The death they produce is the same (at the other end of the gun, of course ), just that in one case the shooter thinks he did a good job, but in the other one he's not.

DRM does not affect only books. It affects movies, and music and a lot of other things people simply do not notice (eg the spare parts for cars).

The point I was trying to make is that most people find DRM to be rather annoying, and, like me, use these tools to break free. I currently use some tools to free my DVDs from the mandatory trailers (one cannot skip) and other warnings and annoying things (like the necessity to go through menus, which are complicated and long, to switch the language).

I also don't like that I receive via hidden channels a "helping hand" from any online providers suggesting me that the new book/movie/album corresponding to my tastes (as recorded) has been just launched.

It's all self defence.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

The point I was trying to make is that most people find DRM to be rather annoying, and, like me, use these tools to break free.

That's where I think you're wrong. Most people do not find DRM to be annoying; most people are either unaware of it or, if they are aware of it, they just don't give a damn about it. The overwhelming majority of Kindle owners buy their books from Amazon, and don't care about buying elsewhere. The overwhelming majority of DVD buyers don't want to "crack" their DVDs - they just play them. People who care about DRM are a tiny minority; people who care enough to do something about it an even smaller one.

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's where I think you're wrong. Most people do not find DRM to be annoying; most people are either unaware of it or, if they are aware of it, they just don't give a damn about it. The overwhelming majority of Kindle owners buy their books from Amazon, and don't care about buying elsewhere. The overwhelming majority of DVD buyers don't want to "crack" their DVDs - they just buy them. People who care about DRM are a tiny minority.

They are all aware of, one way or the other, but most people however think it's how it is and learn to live with and/or deplore the "good ole times". The resurrection of analogue (vinyl) is in partly due this "before it was better" symptom. Although the Satellite fora also forbid the discussion of cheating-DRM, more and more people are sick and tired of the restrictions put there and try to find "alternative solutions". The people at one particular video forum are doing the same, yet this is not to pirate things (such discussions are promptly closed) but to avoid these awkward situations. Are you serious in telling me people are not annoyed by forcibly watching the trailers before the main feature????

I only once met a movie on DVD that instead of the typical warning displayed: Thank you for buying this DVD for 1 second then went into the main menu. Is it so hard?

Now, for this case. I own several Sonies. I have a love-hate relationship with Sony. They drop out the eReader business, for not being too much returning. The readers were redirected to Kobo libraries and bookshops. What happened to some DRM-books not "transferable"? Probably paid-and-lost. Is anti-DRM a legitimate means to get back my paid merchandise? Apparently not. Because the DMCA stays forever, even if the copyright will eventually lapse, in 50, 70, 95, on million years.

So, to avoid any complications, I stay with non DRM books, and those I make myself. I also stay with standards. Because anyway, like in antiquity, as in the Middle Age, as in the Romantic period, a good book was issued every 3-5 years. So it is today. Out of the billions of book printed or issued because countless authors have contracts to write a book a year, only a handful are really worth to be read.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

They are all aware of, one way or the other,

Honestly, Ghitulescu, you credit people with too much knowledge. Many of the people I work with now have ebook readers (almost all Kindles) and most of them aren't even aware that such a thing as DRM exists. Seriously.

Similarly most people aren't aware of things like region coding on DVDs, because they never encounter DVDs from a different region.

[piperclassique]

Harry, I don't think that the majority are unaware of either DRM or DVD region coding. I believe many, maybe most, people know it exists, but don't worry about it until they see a book that they want to buy but cannot read on what they have. I have a friend who has a kindle and a nook, which is her way of dealing with the DRM. I have offered to convert files for her, but she is happy using the reader that she needs at any given time.

My husband has a kindle, and knows how to use it to buy books, but is too lazy to investigate further. He does understand about DRM, just leaves all the sterilising to me, and re formatting to his preferences. That's not a problem for me, we share our Amazon account and I deal with the epubs for him and side load them. I think peole are often like him, they know but can't be bothered.