EU forcing DRM interoperability

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by SpiderMatt

In that case, wouldn't DRM be simply be exercising "the right to decide what you are allowed to do with your book," not adding to it?

The author has no such right.

When an author releases a book, the only rights he has (regarding the book) are granted by copyright. Copyright only addresses the ability to control copies and nothing more.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Which you have been told several times how they are not protected.

How is the key word. With enough time and effort you can copy anything. I can even hand copy a book. This is not the point, so please don't change the subject so that it might fit your argument.

You've obviously never bought a commercial eBook then. Many of the ones I get from places like Fictionwise have many OCR errors.

I did buy commercial ebooks and still do. My main interest is in commercial books. And have never found any OCR errors. I usually buy at fictionswise or mobipocket.

Also, many sites that offer free (legal) eBooks use a distributed approach to proofreading.

Which proofs again what amount of time and effort is needed to do it.

And look how fast the Harry Potter eBooks were made available (and well proofread) after the paper book came out.

And I'm sure you even had been able to buy illegal paper book versions of Harry Potter on some Chinese market if you would have only looked close enough.

Right. And how do you justify the additional rights that DRM creates for the author?

Ask the authors. They have the rights to sell their books with what ever restrictions attached they want. If you don't like that, then don't buy their books. If I don't like the bagels my baker is offering, I don't buy them. I'll go to another bakery. But I certainly will not steal them. And if I don't like that cheap mobile calling plan they are offering because I would be bound two years to the provider and would have to pay high rates, then I don't subscribe to that plan. I'll go and find myself a better offer. But many people think they could have everything on their own terms. That is the real problem here.

Originally Posted by NatCh

I'd agree that if I were to remove the DRM I could certainly do what you're describing, but with DRM intact ... lending is fairly complicated (usually requires lending the whole device or registering the lendee's device on my account, or some such), and transferring to other devices has similar complications, plus those related to format/device incompatibility that can't be overcome without DRM removal.

Lending is indeed more complicated than with a paper book at the first place. You have to register your friends device on the site you bought the book at. But that's all. If you lend a paper book, it will be gone until it is returned to you. Your ebook is not gone. You can still read it. That is a major advantage.

Format incompatibility is a problem. You have to decide which format will be good for your or for what ever purpose you want to use that ebook. It's the same with a DVD. If you lend a DVD, the borrower needs a compatible player. Most people have one. Sure, because DVD players are widely available. So are ebook readers and many formats.

Alan

[Alan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

The author has no such right.

When an author releases a book, the only rights he has (regarding the book) are granted by copyright. Copyright only addresses the ability to control copies and nothing more.

The author can sell you his product at whatever terms he wants. If you don't like it, don't buy it. As a seller you define the rules. If the buyer doesn't want to buy something from you because he doesn't like those rules, than he will decline your offer. If he does buy, he will be bound by those rules.

Alan

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Alan

The author can sell you his product at whatever terms he wants. [...] As a seller you define the rules.

Oh, so now people should not be able to buy books until they are 18 years of age? Or maybe children should be able to sign legal contracts? Or how is this supposed to work?

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Alan

How is the key word. With enough time and effort you can copy anything. I can even hand copy a book. This is not the point, so please don't change the subject so that it might fit your argument.

I'm not changing the argument.

You have asserted that authors need the ability to protect their works when their works are in an electronic format. Yet, as you admit, they have no such protection today.

So you need to justify why they need more rights for their electronic versions of their works than they have for the paper version.

Originally Posted by Alan

Ask the authors. They have the rights to sell their books with what ever restrictions attached they want.

Then you should be able to quote the law that gives an author such a right.

I can find no such law.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Alan

The author can sell you his product at whatever terms he wants.

No, he can't.

The author has 2 choices:
1. Release his work under copyright law.
2. Not release his work.

If he chooses to release his work under copyright law, the only rights he has is the right to control commercial copying. Period.

[astra]

Originally Posted by Alan

To protect their work against illegitimate reproducing. To copy a paper book it needs a lot of time. The result will never be like the original. To copy an ebook it needs a second and the result will be exactly like the original.

Sure, you will find ebooks on the darknet even so authors use DRM. But it is clearly illegal and takes some effort to find them. A paper book has still better copy protection but at least the ebook with DRM makes it more difficult to make copies.

Alan

LIT format is virtually DRM free one.
No one strip LITs files of drm and post them on the darknet.

It is a proof that DRM is useless and unnecessary.

However,

illegitimate reproducing

takes place when people do not have a legitimate and fair source of the content. DRMed books do not fall into fair source cathegory. Hence, there is darknet. If ebooks were sold DRM-free....most people would just buy them, like they buy LIT files now strip DRM yet do not upload the files to the darknet.

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Alan

YOU don't want DRM, so does others. But please do not even try to speak for all people. [...] You know what is great? I can decide for myself, what is good for me and what is not. But dictatorships tend to decide this on behalf of their people.

If you're against government regulations (or "dictatorship" as you call it) then I'm sure you're against copyright as well. After all, copyright is very invasive regulation, in which the government has decided on behalf of the people that the people are better off without their natural right to copy.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by msundman

Oh, so now people should not be able to buy books until they are 18 years of age? Or maybe children should be able to sign legal contracts? Or how is this supposed to work?

If the author decides to sell his work only to people older than 18 years then it is his decision. The author sells a good (book) and it is his decision to whom he will sell it.

Originally Posted by rlauzon

You have asserted that authors need the ability to protect their works when their works are in an electronic format. Yet, as you admit, they have no such protection today.

Of course they have. It is far more difficult to copy paper books than ebooks.

So you need to justify why they need more rights for their electronic versions of their works than they have for the paper version.

Well, actually they have less rights with ebooks. As mentioned before a paper book is a physical good. If you lend it, you are not able to use it anymore until you get it back. You can lend an ebook and still read it yourself. A paper book can only be used once at a time. You cannot divide it or multiply it. Ebooks can usually be used on at least four difference e-reading devices.

Then you should be able to quote the law that gives an author such a right. I can find no such law.

Quote the law that says I don't have to sell you my car. Can't find it? So that would mean, that I do have to sell it to you. Right?

If an author sells you a book under the premise that you are not allowed to lend it (just an example), than there is a legal contract between the seller (author) and a buyer (you). If you don't like certain terms in that contract, don't buy the book.

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

If ebooks were sold DRM-free....most people would just buy them, like they buy LIT files now strip DRM yet do not upload the files to the darknet.

Audio CDs are DRM free. That is why people buy so much of them instead of downloading music files illegally from Emule. I guess I do not lock my car in the future. It will only be stolen because I locked it. If I do not lock it, the car theft rate will most certainly dramatically decline. At least if I would follow your "logic".

Originally Posted by msundman

If you're against government regulations (or "dictatorship" as you call it) then I'm sure you're against copyright as well. After all, copyright is very invasive regulation, in which the government has decided on behalf of the people that the people are better off without their natural right to copy.

The government has decided nothing. It is the author and publisher who decides what will happen with their books. If an author don't want to copyright his book, well, that's fine. Everybody can use his work as he wishes. Or if a phone company sells me a cell phone without any contract, that is fine as well. Great. But maybe it decides to sell it to me for a much lower price but with a two-year contract and a monthly fee and high rates. It's their decision. If I don't want it, I don't buy it.

Alan

[igorsk]

Originally Posted by Alan

Of course they have. It is far more difficult to copy paper books than ebooks.

Is it?
Here's a rather old article, but still relevant.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/l...0100490700.htm
Technical measures won't stop illegal copying no matter how much the DRM snake oil is advertised. Better prices, availability and compatibility of ebooks would do much more than useless encryption which only troubles legit users.

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Alan

The government has decided nothing.

Yes, it has. As I said, it has decided that people are better off without their natural right to copy. The fact that a copyright-holder is able to return a small part of this right (as if it was a privilege) to the people is beside the point.

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Alan

If the author decides to sell his work only to people older than 18 years then it is his decision.

This is clearly not suitable for normal (e)books. I don't think it's wrong to put a license on a book or a potato or a pencil or whatever, but I do think that such a contract should be void if it's very easy to "sign" (e.g. by pressing an "I agree"-button or somesuch). AFAIK that's the case in most countries. E.g., I think "by opening this CD-case you agree to the license X"-type EULAs are void almost everywhere.

If sellers are forced to make buyers know what they are buying (if the sellers want to impose their additional, non-standard restrictions) then it will probably have the effect that buyers won't be so eager to buy from places where they have many restrictions.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by msundman

Yes, it has. As I said, it has decided that people are better off without their natural right to copy.

The government has only set general rules so that not every right holder has to define its own rights. But the laws are only defaults or fall-backs. They can be altered in both directions and only apply if the right holder does not define other rules.

Originally Posted by msundman

This is clearly not suitable for normal (e)books.

Of course not, it was only an example.

but I do think that such a contract should be void if it's very easy to "sign" (e.g. by pressing an "I agree"-button or somesuch).

Even oral contracts are legit. And to say "Yes" is very easy.

AFAIK that's the case in most countries. E.g., I think "by opening this CD-case you agree to the license X"-type EULAs are void almost everywhere.

I can only speak about Germany. Here such general rules are void if they contain "surprising" terms that cannot not be easily recognized or are inherent of the contract itself. An example: If you shop online and buy some shirts, you will sign a contract with the seller. He will give you some shirts and you give him some money. It would certainly be a big surprise if you would have automatically signed a non-terminable subscription that would bind you to buy 20 shirts per year for the next five years. However, such a subscription would be valid, if it was clearly offered as such.

So it always depends on how the terms are being published to the customer.

If sellers are forced to make buyers know what they are buying (if the sellers want to impose their additional, non-standard restrictions) then it will probably have the effect that buyers won't be so eager to buy from places where they have many restrictions.

And what restrictions would I not know, when I buy an ebook? At least on sites like fictionwise and mobipocket the restrictions are clearly named. So are they on iTunes - an people love to buy music there.

Alan

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Alan

The government has only set general rules so that not every right holder has to define its own rights. But the laws are only defaults or fall-backs. They can be altered in both directions and only apply if the right holder does not define other rules.

So, if the government has not decided on my behalf that I'm better off without my natural right to copy then I, as the holder of that right, will not give away that right regarding the books I've bought.

[TallMomof2]

Originally Posted by igorsk

Is it?
Here's a rather old article, but still relevant.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/l...0100490700.htm
Technical measures won't stop illegal copying no matter how much the DRM snake oil is advertised. Better prices, availability and compatibility of ebooks would do much more than useless encryption which only troubles legit users.

Even here in the US, I have spent many hours copying books for teachers at my children's school. Some of the books, workbooks for the most part, gave explicit permission to be copied by a teacher for the class. But most of the books, even though directly related to teaching, weren't supposed to be copied.

The county pays for the these illegal copies which means I pay for them through my taxes. The county budget doesn't allow enough money for the teachers to purchase legal copies of the books so the teachers get around that by having copying the book on the school copy machine.