Adobe ePub DRM cracked?

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

It's only because DRM is regularly cracked that publishers eventually realize that DRM doesn't work and stop using it.

I agree. If people just avoid DRM'd content, publishers will say "there's no demand for ebooks." There are no good statistical methods for tracking non-DRM ebook sales (so few publishers offer them, and many are very limited genres, that those numbers are often discounted), and none at all for tracking free public domain & Creative Commons ebook usage.

Making DRM removal easy and widespread shows publishers that they're paying a lot of money on programming for a false sense of security--money that could be going into profits.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Politically speaking, I like the way you are thinking. Sadly, the DMCA makes it a felony to provide DRM-cracking tools to someone else, to tell someone where to get such tools, or to tell them how to use the tools. That means that the forum you're suggesting is highly likely to run afoul of DMCA problems. And that would be a bad thing to expose our hosts to.

The DMCA makes it legal to crack the DRM if the DRM prevents the read-aloud feature from working. That means that it's legal in the USA to crack Adobe PDF and MS Reader formats as the DRM blocks the read aloud features.

[astra]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

I disagree. If DRM is not cracked publishers are going to have no incentive to stop using it. DRM, if it works, is an excellent way for publishers to extract more money from content. If DRM worked, all publishers would use it. It's only because DRM is regularly cracked that publishers eventually realize that DRM doesn't work and stop using it. Just look at the trajectory the music industry followed.

Well said!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I agree. If people just avoid DRM'd content, publishers will say "there's no demand for ebooks." There are no good statistical methods for tracking non-DRM ebook sales (so few publishers offer them, and many are very limited genres, that those numbers are often discounted), and none at all for tracking free public domain & Creative Commons ebook usage.

Making DRM removal easy and widespread shows publishers that they're paying a lot of money on programming for a false sense of security--money that could be going into profits.

We cannot just not purchase because of DRM. If we are going to boycott eBooks, we have to contact the eBook shops and the publishers to tell them why we are nt purchasing. If we just stop, then they weill think we don't want eBooks and we'll lose out in the end.

[astra]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

We cannot just not purchase because of DRM. If we are going to boycott eBooks, we have to contact the eBook shops and the publishers to tell them why we are nt purchasing. If we just stop, then they weill think we don't want eBooks and we'll lose out in the end.

They will not think so. They monitor here and there....and they are well aware about darknet. They know that their doom is nigh, so they are desperate to milk as much money as possible before it cometh...
It is easy to point a finger and said it is someone else fault. They are bringing it upon themselves.They don't want to adapt.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The DMCA makes it legal to crack the DRM if the DRM prevents the read-aloud feature from working. That means that it's legal in the USA to crack Adobe PDF and MS Reader formats as the DRM blocks the read aloud features.

Please note: I didn't write anything about the legality (or lack thereof) of actually cracking the DRM (for personal use only, on legally acquired content). Legal opinions differ on the subject. I've heard eminent legal scholars tell a graduate seminar that it's squeaky-clean legal. And heard other eminent legal scholars tell the same seminar that it's obviously illegal. In the end, we won't know until there's a court case.

What I wrote about was the legality of telling others about DRM-removal tools, how to use such tools, and where to get such tools. Sadly, that part is not in dispute -- everyone agrees that the DMCA makes the second and third of those illegal (and may or may not make the first illegal). And that is the liability we don't want to expose our hosts to.

Xenophon

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The DMCA makes it legal to crack the DRM if the DRM prevents the read-aloud feature from working. That means that it's legal in the USA to crack Adobe PDF and MS Reader formats as the DRM blocks the read aloud features.

That's just tap-dancing around the real issue. I don't need or use the read-aloud feature. So by the logic of DMCA, I should not be allowed to crack any DRM. Wrong! I bought the danged book and I'll darned well read it on any danged device I own!

Derek

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

That's just tap-dancing around the real issue. I don't need or use the read-aloud feature. So by the logic of DMCA, I should not be allowed to crack any DRM. Wrong! I bought the danged book and I'll darned well read it on any danged device I own!

Derek

HEAR HEAR!

[slayda]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Please note: I didn't write anything about the legality (or lack thereof) of actually cracking the DRM (for personal use only, on legally acquired content). Legal opinions differ on the subject. I've heard eminent legal scholars tell a graduate seminar that it's squeaky-clean legal. And heard other eminent legal scholars tell the same seminar that it's obviously illegal. In the end, we won't know until there's a court case.

What I wrote about was the legality of telling others about DRM-removal tools, how to use such tools, and where to get such tools. Sadly, that part is not in dispute -- everyone agrees that the DMCA makes the second and third of those illegal (and may or may not make the first illegal). And that is the liability we don't want to expose our hosts to.

Xenophon

Based on this statement and by the strictest definition of tools, all computer programing & classes on such are tools for removing DRM. Yes they are also tools for all software. DRM removal would not be possible without the programming tools, and in fact would not be possible without language so therefore language itself is illegal since it is a DRM removal tool. (I admit the is argument ad absurdum but it is no less true.)

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Yes you can. People in the UK get prosecuted for (for example) going to Thailand and having underage sex with children, even though that is not llegal in Thailand but is illegal in the UK.

You are one suspect SOB if you equate the molestation of children with copying an ebook or removing the DRM.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The DMCA makes it legal to crack the DRM if the DRM prevents the read-aloud feature from working. That means that it's legal in the USA to crack Adobe PDF and MS Reader formats as the DRM blocks the read aloud features.

So YOU claim. Can you refer us to a court decision which supports this viewpoint?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

You are one suspect SOB if you equate the molestation of children with copying an ebook or removing the DRM.

<sigh>

Please read the post that I was replying to before you start calling people names. The poster claimed "you can't be guilty of a crime if you're outside the juresdiction of the law". I was providing a counter-example to this statement, NOT saying that the two crimes were the same.

[brecklundin]

I will not debate this issue with you..."sigh" all you want...your statement is what it is...I have zero respect for anyone who uses something so vile and truly inhumane as a way to equate it to something so trivial in comparison.

I will respond no further...

[HarryT]

No great loss there, then, since you've shown yourself to be incapable of holding a sensible conversation without offering personal insults to people.

[SpiderMatt]

Originally Posted by HarryT

<sigh>

Please read the post that I was replying to before you start calling people names. The poster claimed "you can't be guilty of a crime if you're outside the juresdiction of the law". I was providing a counter-example to this statement, NOT saying that the two crimes were the same.

On the other hand, you can't drink under 21 in the U.S. but a U.S. citizen falls under the drinking laws of whatever country he's in. I was drinking legally plenty while traveling abroad before I was 21.