DRM confusion

[ebookrights]

Not that it will certainly make a difference, but please sign the petition if you think it's appropriate.

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/ebookrights

[glin]

Seems it is necessary to be subscribed to Facebook to sign it and I hate Facebook.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by glin

Seems it is necessary to be subscribed to Facebook to sign it and I hate Facebook.

I use Facebook, but only to keep in touch with family and friends, so I refused it permission to access my basic information, which "... includes name, profile picture, gender, networks, user ID, list of friends and any other information I've shared with everyone". Perhaps the OP could use one of the less invasive ways of setting up their petition.

[DiapDealer]

Perhaps the OP could use one of the less invasive ways of setting up their petition.

Or perhaps come to the realization that a petition will achieve nothing in this particular scenario. Wail and moan all you like, but the only way DRM goes away is if everybody stops paying for ebooks with DRM. Since that is unlikely to happen, you're just pissing into the wind with a petition.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

... you're just pissing into the wind with a petition.

Ah, the cup half empty argument.

[DiapDealer]

Ah, the cup half empty argument.

Depends on how hard the wind's blowing.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Depends on how hard the wind's blowing.

Not enough to force me off tack.

[HPOliver]

Way back in 1949 RCA Victor had a brilliant idea. Instead of continuing to cut 78 RPM records like everybody else, they invented the 45 RPM seven-inch disk pressed from vinyl. Not only that, but they put big spindle hole in the middle of it and patented the whole kit and caboodle. True, RCA’s “microgroove” technology drastically improved sound quality, but you had buy an RCA phonograph to hear it.

What does this have to do with DRM and e-books? It’s pretty much the same thing. RCA came up with a gimmick to monopolize the record business and it worked. Eventually the entire industry went to the 45 RPM format and paid RCA handsomely for the privilege of doing so. Record enthusiasts got better quality sound reproduction and RCA got rich(er), so the only losers were those who purchased alternative systems that became obsolete.

It seems likely the same thing will happen in the world of e-books, just as it did with the video tape wars in the 1970s, which incidentally were won by a division of RCA (JVC). The best product and most effective marketing will eventually prevail. In the meantime, all you have to do is jump on the right bandwagon when you buy your next e-reader.

H.P.

[speedlever]

Originally Posted by HPOliver

snip
In the meantime, all you have to do is jump on the right bandwagon when you buy your next e-reader.

H.P.

That sounds like a leap of faith!

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by HPOliver

... RCA came up with a gimmick to monopolize the record business and it worked ...the only losers were those who purchased alternative systems that became obsolete. It seems likely the same thing will happen in the world of e-books ...

You seem to be arguing in favour of a situation where a monopoly is encouraged to prevail. At its height, Sony's Betamax (ie VHS' rival) held 25% of the UK market. That's a lot of losers. I doubt they've have forgotten their experience. Using software as an alternative example, I imagine that most OS X and Linux users are glad that Microsoft doesn't hold a monopoly. Surely consumers are better off when given a free choice, rather than having a gimmick forced on them by marketing people.

[HPOliver]

Originally Posted by boxcorner

You seem to be arguing in favour of a situation where a monopoly is encouraged to prevail. At its height, Sony's Betamax (ie VHS' rival) held 25% of the UK market. That's a lot of losers. I doubt they've have forgotten their experience. Using software as an alternative example, I imagine that most OS X and Linux users are glad that Microsoft doesn't hold a monopoly. Surely consumers are better off when given a free choice, rather than having a gimmick forced on them by marketing people.

Boxcorner, I’m not arguing in favor of anything. I simply cited a case in history to illustrate the point that e-reader formats will eventually be resolved in the marketplace.

That having been said, I will also point out that free choice in the marketplace is a wonderful dream, but it lacks practicality in this instance. For one thing, having several different e-reader formats from which to choose creates an economic barrier to new manufacturers. There may be someone out there right now with the engineering ability to produce an e-reader far superior in features and/or price to those currently available, but that person would be justifiably reluctant to manufacture the product because whatever format he/she chooses may end up going the way of the Beta video cartridge.

So would a choice between multiple e-reader platforms be better than expanding our choices of superior e-readers? I don’t know the answer to that question, but I’m pretty sure you can’t have it both ways.

H.P.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

It would be a bit muddier for the Kindle (and maybe other devices that are tied to one ebook shop). It is against the Amazon user agreement to remove DRM from anything you buy from them, and I would guess that they would have some way of checking when you go online with it.

If Amazon started checking eBooks on the Kindle, then there would be a huge outcry. So I highly doubt Amazon would do that.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by EricLandes

And all of that put together has half (or less) the volume Amazon has. Every measure I've seen puts the Amazon market share somewhere around 70-75%.

How, exactly has ePub "won" when that's the case? I grant you it's the better format, and it's the only one where I can buy in one shop and read on multiple devices (natively) without circumventing DRM.

There are four major formats, btw: Apple ePub, B&N ePub, Adobe ePub, and Amazon. The vast majority do not know how (or want to know how) to circumvent DRM.

That said, there's Amazon apps on every multi-function device out there, pretty much. Of course, you can't read your Amazon books on any other dedicated eReader, but someone investing in the Amazon ecosystem is going to buy a Kindle, anyway.

ePub is usable in most dedicated readers. Most devices that the Kindle app works with also have program(s) to be able to read ePub. Overdrive library eBooks are mostly ePub. Most online eBook sellers sell ePub then any other format. In most of the world (outside the USA), ePub is the standard the publishers use.

You use the measure of available eBooks on Amazon vs others. Maybe there's more. But a lot of that is self-published dreck that is not worth reading even if free. Not all of the self-published eBooks on Amazon is dreck. But a lot of it is. A lot of that is public domain with lots of duplicates. A lot are Topaz and Topaz doesn't count.

But the amount of eBooks on Amazon is not an indicator that AZW has won the format war. Topaz format doesn't matter.

So when you look at the world as a whole, you will see that ePub has become the dominant format.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Boston

While DRM and restriction to specific users or their devices is a publisher requirement, it was always my opinion that the different implementations of DRM were the booksellers trying to restrict buyers of their devices to buying from their stores.

Sony tried that with BBeB (LRF/LRX). Sony wised up and realized they needed a different format on their Readers besides something that was proprietary to just Sony. Sony wanted Mobipocket, but could not get it due to Mobipocket insisting that they be the only format that allows DRM. So as luck would have it, ePub came out and Adobe had ADE. Sony went with Adobe and ADE for ePub and that was how ePub started to grow. And now ePub has won the war.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

It wasn't just America that they bought laws in. The UK has a new law that says you are presumed guilty of copyright violation as soon as you are accused of it. That part of the law was written by the BPI (I think the American equivalent is the RIAA -- conglomerate of music publishers).

What happened to due process or presumed innocent until found guilty? So someone can commit murder and he's not automatically guilty but if someone is even thought to strip DRM from an eBook, he's automatically a criminal? That's 100% BS.