The beginning of the end for DRM?

[QuantumIguana]

I've actually never removed the DRM from a book. I simply reserve the right to do so if I need to in order to continue reading the books that I paid for. Thus far, I haven't needed to.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You purchase WITH a credit card.

And what in the world does that have to do with the statement by CyGuy? Don't we have enough strawmen already?

Originally Posted by HarryT

Hmmm. Not sure I could agree with you there. I'm rather pleased that my credit cards use data encryption, for example.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

What poor word choice? What's is sociopathic or egomaniacal about the being able to read what you paid for where you wish?

Saying you are paying for "reading as you wish" doesn't make it so if those were not the terms you signed up for.
Not a agreeing with a term doesn't make it "null and void".
And an agreement becoming "null and void" does not mean "I get all the benefits I want and don't have to live up to my end."

But, if I may paraphrase, I think what you're saying is that some of the license terms are unfair. They attempt to unfairly restrict legal, reasonable and customary uses of the IP and it is wrong to expect users to interpret the terms that way, and agree to them.

ApK

[QuantumIguana]

If a license for a book said that you may read the book while sitting on the couch, but not on your dining room table, that license would be null and void, people would rightfully ignore it. I consider any license which tells me where I can read books that I paid for to be no different than the hypothetical license which restricted you to reading on your couch.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

If a license for a book said that you may read the book while sitting on the couch, but not on your dining room table, that license would be null and void, people would rightfully ignore it. I consider any license which tells me where I can read books that I paid for to be no different than the hypothetical license which restricted you to reading on your couch.

I'd rather read on the couch anyway

[ApK]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

If a license for a book said that you may read the book while sitting on the couch, but not on your dining room table, that license would be null and void, people would rightfully ignore it. I consider any license which tells me where I can read books that I paid for to be no different than the hypothetical license which restricted you to reading on your couch.

As a blanket statement, you are wrong. Just because a term sounds silly to you doesn't mean there may not be a good, and enforceable, reason for it. And even if term is found to be unreasonable and unenforceable, that does not automatically mean the whole agreement is invalidated.
And even if the whole agreement were invalidated, your recourse might be to get your money back and give up all rights to the book, not just do whatever you feel like with the book.

The arguments here should be about the specifics, not misapplied generalities or analogies.

ApK

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by ApK

As a blanket statement, you are wrong. Just because a term sounds silly to you doesn't mean there may not be a good, and enforceable, reason for it. And even if term is found to be unreasonable and unenforceable, that does not automatically mean the whole agreement is invalidated.
And even if the whole agreement were invalidated, your recourse might be to get your money back and give up all rights to the book, not just do whatever you feel like with the book.

The arguments here should be about the specifics, not misapplied generalities or analogies.

ApK

I never said that I could "do whatever I felt like" with the book. I only asserted the right to read the content that I paid for.

Just because you find the analogies inconvenient doesn't mean they are misapplied.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I never said that I could "do whatever I felt like" with the book. I only asserted the right to read the content that I paid for.

No, you're claiming the right to dictate or ignore the terms arbitrarily. At least, you're stating it in a way that makes it sounds arbitrary.

Just because you find the analogies inconvenient doesn't mean they are misapplied.

I find analogies to be very convenient if they are appropriate. If they are not appropriate, then convenience has nothing to do with it.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by ApK

No, you're claiming the right to dictate or ignore the terms arbitrarily. At least, you're stating it in a way that makes it sounds arbitrary.

It's not arbitrary at all. Random House defines "arbitrary" as "subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision." The requirement to have paid for the book is a restriction, and I haven't asserted that people should be able to give copies away.

I find analogies to be very convenient if they are appropriate. If they are not appropriate, then convenience has nothing to do with it.

The analogy is quite sound. Again, suppose a license stated that a person could only read the book when sitting on their couch, but not when sitting at their dining room table, You could of course insist that the only choice someone had would be to read the book only on the couch, or to not buy the book. Most people would read the book at their dining room table if they felt like it. If you take the latter position, that implies that at least in some cases, we aren't obligated by license agreements. The question is then whether not which license agreements obligate us, and to what extent we are obligated. What a court might say is a different matter entirely.

[Freeshadow]

I'd just suggest that we keep the 1st posts content in mind, cheer,
that book publishers may - be it slowly but nevertheless - learn the mp3 lesson instead of again.

[Lynx-lynx]

Well, methinks that they darn well need to ACT and not just discuss DRM issues between and amongst the worldwide publishing fraternity!!!!

'Banning' something (akin to DRM restrictions on books) has never worked in free and liberal societies and only creates an 'underground' market for ways and means to evade not only the ban but also likely or real ramifications.

I agree with all the posters who've made overtures to the fact that they do it their way with respect to buying a book with DRM attached and choosing how, when and where to read it.

As for Amazon, I don't touch them ..... they don't have an Australian site, you have to pay in US dollars and it gets converted - they ever want my business then not only sell to me in AUD, but also list the prices in AUD.

I recently noticed that the English company Book Depository now has a free and non DRM ebook section with quite a number of varied authors and subjects listed.

Here is what they say:

'Why are we doing this? It's a great way to discover lots of great ebooks (many of which are strange and obscure like, A Honeymoon in Space) with no risk. And, who knows, if you like it you may even want to buy a physical copy!'
(http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/free)

I'm guessing they've realised that it makes good sense to release non DRM restricted books and that this may be their only current method of doing so because of various agreements they may have with publishing houses.

Of course, that is mere speculation on my behalf as to their reasoning.

[speakingtohe]

So far I have been able to read my ebooks on my ereaders, my desktop, my tablet, my laptop and my phone.

My pbooks I can only read by holding the book although I could scan them and have the same alternatives with a lot of effort and frankly I would rather just buy the book again rather than scanning and proofing it.

Expecting to have universal access to a book seems a bit much. You buy a paper book you can read it on the couch or at the table etc. Same with an ebook.

Maybe you can't read your epubs on a mobi device or your mobi books on an epub device, but how many pbooks can you just automatically read on either.

Myself, I will live with DRM. I see no more danger of an ebook becoming unreadable than a physical book. Much less in fact. If a physical book is destroyed it is gone, with an ebook I probably have a backup or can download it again from the seller. Maybe not always, but no seller that I know of will just send me another copy of a paper book. And would I want them to? I have been reading 3-9 paper books a week for 50+ years. Minimum 7800 books, probably 15,000. More than 1/2 I bought new. Where would I keep them all and why would I want to? To earn a place on Hoarders TV show?

Sure I would have kept them all if they were ebooks, and possibly reread a few. But I am probably strange in that I would rather read a book that I haven't read before. Most of the strong opponents of DRM probably have all the books they have ever bought, or have never bought a book that they didn't lend to a lot of people and then resell it for a substantial sum. I find this a bit hard to believe but could be true. And they have probably had many ebooks chewed up by DRM.

Me I buy the book, or borrow the book from the library. I read the book. If I still have the book forever this is an advantage of it being an ebook. If I don't, well nothing new.

Helen

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

mobi versus epub ?

No argument there. Mobi is obsolete. ePub wins.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Apparently these licenses have never been tested in court. Not everything that you sign is necessarily binding. Some rights you cannot just sign away. And the big button still says "buy" book, not "licence" book.

Legally, what happens when you have an Amazon account before eBooks and you've never read the terms and conditions and you've never had to agree to them before buying an eBook? That is my situation with Amazon. So (IMHO), the terms and conditions are not valid.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

How do you purchase a credit card?

By using it, of course. Interest is the purchase price -- and a rather steep price it can be. And then there's theft, as mentioned by my learned colleague.

It will be interesting to see what happens when identity theft and piracy become so ubiquitous that citizens of the world are forced to question the practicality of ownership. Logistically (not ethically or idealistically), I can't see the result being a world full of Marxists or even neo-Platonists holding hands. I'll curious be to see how opportunism, greed and crowd control manage to manipulate the situation.

I haven't been paying enough attention to SF, but I expect more than a few authors must have covered that specific scenario.