Is the e-book threatening the future of our literary culture?

[HarryT]

You've only mentioned unencrypted books there, Steve. Does ePub not offer any support for DRM? Bit of a "dead duck" if it doesn't!

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You've only mentioned unencrypted books there, Steve. Does ePub not offer any support for DRM? Bit of a "dead duck" if it doesn't!

Oh, I'm sure some ******* will come up with a way to encapsulate the whole thing into a password-protected package. But as we've been discussing, there's more to selling e-books than DRM. If ePub couldn't be encrypted, and the major booksellers refused to use it, that would only leave the rest of us (and Adobe and Sony) using it. I'd cope.

[HarryT]

One doesn't have to like DRM to accept the commercial reality of the fact that the big booksellers are always going to want to use it. If ePub doesn't support it, I suspect that that will only strengthen MobiPocket's position - they seem to be increasingly becoming the market leaders.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

The reality is that the Big Publishers aren't expending the effort into e-book selling that non-DRM selling independents are expending. As the market evolves beyond the traditional publishing model, the Big Publishers may not be the leaders of the book market forever.

[LaughingVulcan]

One of the other questions (the biggest for me, and I think for many) is the question of portability. We see this here all the time, expressed more or less as, "I hate DRM because then I am tied to {Mobipocket, eReader, Sony, Adobe, etc.}"

To me, most (if not all) of my objections to DRM would go away if I can be assured that the books I buy this year will work next year. Or, more on point, should Sony decide to yank Connect Store, quit selling the Reader, and shut it down a la their music service, how will I then enjoy my books when the Reader breaks?

The best solution I've seen to this are stores like Fictionwise, which vends it's books in different formats. Or Baen, not just for the DRM-free content, but because they can be D/Led in HTML, RTF, etc.

It's not quite like the ATRAC thing, as even Sony is now suggesting that you burn your files and then rip them back in MP3. The equivalent can be done with screen or scan OCR, but I've yet to see a program that's really good and fast at it that's remotely economical.

One suggestion I mentioned would be a third party company who will convert your secure files for you. This has immense logistical problems, though.

Another potential solution: Find a way to make the DRM independent of the file format - something like a universal DRM format for all types of eBook file. What I'm thinking here is it wouldn't matter what format your book is encrypted in ~ and the file could be converted to any other format safely (from the publisher's perspective) because the same DRM still exists on the new converted file.
The biggest limitation here might be the economics of publishing itself: What motivation is there for a publisher to adopt either such proposal? It's in the publisher's economic interest to have you re-pay for books every 3-5 years. I'm not sure if there is a deliberative planned obsolescence in the publisher or software company's strategy, but it sadly would make sense if there is.
Also, the notion that any DRM scheme may eventually be broken would hamper this idea - does the publishing community as a whole really want all its eggs in one basket? But that would depend on just how secure such a system could be made.

Last idea: Have your purchase of the eBook on file with the publisher, not just the vendor, with a commitment in the licensing from the publisher that you are entitled to that particular text in any format the publisher uses, now or in the future. Again, it's like Fictionwise multiformat somewhat, but doesn't just rely on the success or failure of one eBook retailer.

Of course, any such solution which ensures portability wouldn't satisfy everyone.... There are those who will still make the argument that all DRM is evil in and of itself, and/or those who feel that they have 'ownership' of the actual text upon purchase of the book. But I still wonder if a solution couldn't be found that removes the concerns of the majority of the book-buying public - one which doesn't cause any hardship upon the end-user at all in comparison to dead tree format.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by LaughingVulcan

One of the other questions (the biggest for me, and I think for many) is the question of portability. We see this here all the time, expressed more or less as, "I hate DRM because then I am tied to {Mobipocket, eReader, Sony, Adobe, etc.}"

To me, most (if not all) of my objections to DRM would go away if I can be assured that the books I buy this year will work next year. Or, more on point, should Sony decide to yank Connect Store, quit selling the Reader, and shut it down a la their music service, how will I then enjoy my books when the Reader breaks?

It's precisely that, LV, which has led to my decision to pretty much abandon the Reader and go with MobiPocket format on all my devices. It's the DRM format which is available on vastly more different platforms than any other, and I'm confident that I'll be able to buy readers which support it for the foreseeable future. I think it's inevitable that BBeB will become and "orphaned" format in the future, with only Sony supporting it.

MobiPocket DRM is rapidly becoming - so it seems to me - the de facto industry standard.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by HarryT

We must agree to differ about that, I'm afraid. I feel personally that MobiPocket's DRM system is fair - you can have up to 5 devices registered, and it's easy to add or remove them at any time - and unobjectionable; it doesn't "get in the way" of reading the book in any way at all. That's why I'm now "standardising" on devices which will read MoibPocket.

Which relates to what I see as a larger issue: the lack of a standard format for ebooks.

DRM aside, I want to download content once, and read it on whatever I happen to have. Standardising on devices which can handle a particular format is an imposition I don't care for. What if a reader for that format doesn't happen to exist for a device I want to use?

Granted, Mobi is about the best of the lot in that sense - they support the most devices, and their format is probably closest to a default standard because of it. I have Mobi installed on my PDA to handle content in Mobi format, but the reader has a couple of really annoying bugs under Palm OS.

If we get a standard format that everyone will support, we are likely to see readers for all devices reasonably soon in consequence. If there is a less-than-draconian DRM system in place to get the files, it will be livable.

I still object to DRM, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to go away. Meanwhile, I side-step the issue. I don't buy DRMed content. There is more stuff that I want to read, freely available without DRM, than I have time for now. I'm not missing anything, as I can get a paper edition, and still happily buy paper books. I see ebooks as an adjunct to standard paper publishing, not a replacement.
______
Dennis

[nekokami]

HarryT, even if one is willing to download files for paper books one already owns, that doesn't mean one doesn't also buy new ebooks. The nice thing about books is that authors keep writing new ones. I for one am more than happy to keep buying new books I haven't yet read.

I don't quite have the confidence that Mobi will be there forever to keep re-registering new devices as old ones may break, though. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to display and read HTML and RTF forever, and I'd really rather pay for my books in those formats, or a format I can convert to those formats.

Even my old software is mostly still usable under emulators on my current equipment -- except for programs that had funky "copy protection" schemes. In those cases, I would need to rummage around to find "cracked" versions in order to keep using what I've paid for. I don't much care for a situation that requires me to break the law in order to keep using something I still hold a legal right to use.

The balance point needs to be in a different place. The enforcement needs to be focused on people who actually are breaking the law (e.g. file uploaders), not people who have merely bought a product and want to use it normally.

As for paying again for content I already own in another form, I know we disagree on this, but there may be a compromise point there, too, e.g. some kind of discount for those who provide some evidence that they own a paper copy. I really can't afford to pay even current Baen prices for every book I already own just to be able to access them while my books are still in the basement. But I could gradually replace my books for say, half-Baen-price, if they were all available legally in an open format.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by LaughingVulcan

To me, most (if not all) of my objections to DRM would go away if I can be assured that the books I buy this year will work next year.

A standardized format would solve many of your concerns: If a publisher or e-book reader went unsupported over time, you could read your purchased e-books on another device without trouble.

Originally Posted by LaughingVulcan

Another potential solution: Find a way to make the DRM independent of the file format - something like a universal DRM format for all types of eBook file.

Conversely, a standard file format could be sold by different publishers, each using their proprietary DRM format. But once the file was unlocked the first time, after being paid for, it would be unlocked forever. And being standardized, it would not be limited to a computer, reader or reader format. (But actually, the same thing would be accomplished simply by selling the e-book.)

Originally Posted by LaughingVulcan

The biggest limitation here might be the economics of publishing itself: What motivation is there for a publisher to adopt either such proposal? It's in the publisher's economic interest to have you re-pay for books every 3-5 years. I'm not sure if there is a deliberative planned obsolescence in the publisher or software company's strategy, but it sadly would make sense if there is.

Maybe, but if book owners find themselves repaying for content they've already bought, they're going to stop buying anything from that publisher, and they're going to tell their friends to do the same. Disney tried that tack with their movie DVDs, and had to yank the idea in response to immediate and vehement customer demand. Any publisher that purposely tries that will only suffer a painful backlash from the market, not a profit.

Originally Posted by LaughingVulcan

Also, the notion that any DRM scheme may eventually be broken would hamper this idea - does the publishing community as a whole really want all its eggs in one basket? But that would depend on just how secure such a system could be made.

Last idea: Have your purchase of the eBook on file with the publisher, not just the vendor, with a commitment in the licensing from the publisher that you are entitled to that particular text in any format the publisher uses, now or in the future.

DRM will always be broken, and adding complexity to the system won't help. If you can't get companies to agree on a book format, they sure won't be able to coordinate a double-database of DRM tracking.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by nekokami

HarryT, even if one is willing to download files for paper books one already owns, that doesn't mean one doesn't also buy new ebooks. The nice thing about books is that authors keep writing new ones. I for one am more than happy to keep buying new books I haven't yet read.

I agree with you 100%! However, with respect, the fact that one buys new books does not make it "OK" to also download "dodgy" ones, does it?

I don't quite have the confidence that Mobi will be there forever to keep re-registering new devices as old ones may break, though. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to display and read HTML and RTF forever, and I'd really rather pay for my books in those formats, or a format I can convert to those formats.

Exactly what I said in another thread only yesterday: PRC/LRF, etc, for reading formats, but HTML, RTF, or even text, if nothing else is available, for long-term archival. It's only DRM'd stuff I choose to buy in Mobi format - given a choice, I always download, for example, Baen books in RTF or HTML.

The balance point needs to be in a different place. The enforcement needs to be focused on people who actually are breaking the law (e.g. file uploaders), not people who have merely bought a product and want to use it normally.

Yes, you're right, of course - it's uploaders who are the criminals. I see absolutely nothing wrong with doing format conversions of stuff you've bought, regardless of what some silly law might say about it.

One thing which does slightly puzzle me, however: if you believe it's OK to download eBooks of books you've already bought as paper books, but think that uploaders should be prosecuted for the criminal scum they are, where are you going to download these eBooks of yours from?

As for paying again for content I already own in another form, I know we disagree on this, but there may be a compromise point there, too, e.g. some kind of discount for those who provide some evidence that they own a paper copy. I really can't afford to pay even current Baen prices for every book I already own just to be able to access them while my books are still in the basement. But I could gradually replace my books for say, half-Baen-price, if they were all available legally in an open format.

That's the argument I don't "get", I'm afraid. If I have a favourite paperback which I read again and again, I know that sooner or later it's going to fall to pieces and I'm going to have to buy a new copy. I don't expect the publisher to give me a discount simply because I've bought it previously. Likewise I don't see any reason why having bought a paper copy of a book should somehow entitle me to a free - or even discounted - copy of the eBook. But we've been through all this before - let's just agree that we differ on that point .

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Maybe, but if book owners find themselves repaying for content they've already bought, they're going to stop buying anything from that publisher, and they're going to tell their friends to do the same. Disney tried that tack with their movie DVDs, and had to yank the idea in response to immediate and vehement customer demand. Any publisher that purposely tries that will only suffer a painful backlash from the market, not a profit.

What was it that Disney tried to do with their DVDs, Steve? I don't think I've heard about that one.

This wasn't the "self-destructing" DVD thing, was it? I actually thought that was an excellent idea - all the benefits of low-cost rentals without the hassle of having to take the thing back to the store afterwards.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by nekokami

As for paying again for content I already own in another form, I know we disagree on this, but there may be a compromise point there, too, e.g. some kind of discount for those who provide some evidence that they own a paper copy.

Not that I think that's a lousy idea, but personally, I don't want 2 books. And I don't want to pay for 2 books. Either I'll get the e-book, or I'll get the paper book, but not both... that's wasteful.

I also don't think the publisher should have to keep up with who "really" bought a paper book and deserves a discounted e-book, etc. I get the impression they've got too much on their plate as it is.

I'm not even much of a fan of providing the e-book with the paper book... that's like including a paperback book with the hardback, to me. Just pick one.

But that's just me.

[JoeC]

Now that I have a Sony Reader I see that I can purchase "paperback" books less expensively than at my local used bookstore. When I buy at my used bookstore the publisher and author lose money. In this example the electronic form is better for the publisher and author.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I agree with you 100%! However, with respect, the fact that one buys new books does not make it "OK" to also download "dodgy" ones, does it?

I don't recall his saying it did...

Exactly what I said in another thread only yesterday: PRC/LRF, etc, for reading formats, but HTML, RTF, or even text, if nothing else is available, for long-term archival. It's only DRM'd stuff I choose to buy in Mobi format - given a choice, I always download, for example, Baen books in RTF or HTML.

And I choose to avoid the issue by not buying DRMed content.

Yes, you're right, of course - it's uploaders who are the criminals.

It takes two. I could theoretically convert and upload all manner of DRMed ebooks, or scan paper volumes to create unauthorized electronic copies, and upload the results. But it's meaningless unless a significant number of people download and read my offerings instead of buying a legitimate copy. If that happens, the content provider is losing revenue, and that prospect is what prompts them to go with DRM to begin with.

The problems are that it's probably not possible to go after the uploaders -- there are too many upload avenues and ways to do so anonymously -- and it's impossible to measure how many folks actually download pirated stuff instead of buying legitimate copies.

Properly speaking, the folks who download the ripped copies are receiving stolen goods, and also criminals.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with doing format conversions of stuff you've bought, regardless of what some silly law might say about it.

Nor do I, as long as you don't then share the files with others unless the original license says you may. But as a practical matter, if you are only converting for your own use, no one will care, even if the content provider becomes aware if it. It may be technically illegal, but it isn't worth the time and effort to enforce the law in that case.

One thing which does slightly puzzle me, however: if you believe it's OK to download eBooks of books you've already bought as paper books, but think that uploaders should be prosecuted for the criminal scum they are, where are you going to download these eBooks of yours from?

I think he's presuming something like the Baen Free Library. I have ebook versions for the library of books I also bought in hardcover. I'm happy to have both formats, as it maens I can read the content wherever I am, because I always have my PDA with my ebook library with me.

That's the argument I don't "get", I'm afraid. If I have a favourite paperback which I read again and again, I know that sooner or later it's going to fall to pieces and I'm going to have to buy a new copy. I don't expect the publisher to give me a discount simply because I've bought it previously. Likewise I don't see any reason why having bought a paper copy of a book should somehow entitle me to a free - or even discounted - copy of the eBook. But we've been through all this before - let's just agree that we differ on that point .

I don't expect to get a free ebook copy of something I have in paper. It's nice, and I take advantage of it where legitimate (the Baen Free Library, various stuff offered under a Creative Commons license), but it's not a burning issue for me.
______
Dennis

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What was it that Disney tried to do with their DVDs, Steve? I don't think I've heard about that one.

This wasn't the "self-destructing" DVD thing, was it? I actually thought that was an excellent idea - all the benefits of low-cost rentals without the hassle of having to take the thing back to the store afterwards.

It might have been called that, but it didn't just "die" after playing: The idea was, you bought it, but you could only play it X number of times. Then it would stop playing, and you had to call or get online to Disney and pay again to have it released for another X viewings.

As reasonable as that might sound to some, the fact that kids often play their favorite movies over and over and over can mean reaching that X viewing in about 2 days. Parents went ballistic, and threatened to burn the Magic Kingdom to the ground before they'd buy into such a scheme. Disney subsequently ditched the idea faster than an ugly blind date.

A good lesson in "how to go too far with DRM."