People who want no DRM are impractical dreamers...

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

THe analogy of a lock is helpful here. A lock on the door will not stop a determined, skilful burglar from breaking into my house. But it will stop the casual amatuer. History shows that when you make it very easy to steal something, it gets stolen a lot. Make it somewhat difficult, and the incidence of theft becomes much less.
The sense of entitelement that the original source was talking about had to do with those who felt that ebooks, like information, should be free.

I'm not sure why you're going on about stealing things, but DRM doesn't even stop the casual amateur. That's the whole point, it's just a one click operation.

Back in your house analogy, all the lock does is stop the home owner from getting into their own house if they lose the front door key. All the squatters just go in through the back window that you left open for the cat.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

But it does apparently do something for writers and publishers . THAT is why the vast majority of writers and publushers still insist on them.

No, they just think it does something for them. It's snake oil licensed by ebook vendors to gullible publishers who are afraid of their own customers. The vendors want it so that they can lock people into their devices, so they convince the publishers that they need it too. It's all a con that we (the consumers) have to pay higher prices for. The only people that benefit from it in any way are the ebook vendors.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

And yet apparently the authors and publishers see such a connection. Guess they don't know their own businesses like you lot.

Given that they will often refuse to sell someone a book because they live in the wrong country, I would say your guess is absolutely right.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

THe analogy of a lock is helpful here. A lock on the door will not stop a determined, skilful burglar from breaking into my house. But it will stop the casual amatuer. History shows that when you make it very easy to steal something, it gets stolen a lot. Make it somewhat difficult, and the incidence of theft becomes much less.
The sense of entitelement that the original source was talking about had to do with those who felt that ebooks, like information, should be free.

How would you like it if you purchased an electronic lock for the front door of your house, say from Home Depot. How would you like it if Home Depot decided which door you could install the lock on? Front door lock only, sorry, can't install it on the side door. Further more, in order for the lock to function, Home Depot must authorize it each time. Home Depot goes out of business, sorry for the now non-functioning lock, too bad.
The truth is that you can install the lock wherever you want. You can disable the electronics to your hearts content. You can burn it, run it over with your car, or smash it with a hammer. It is truly your lock, period.
The real point I am trying to make is this: When you purchase the book, you did not rent it or lease it, you now own that copy to do with as you please for personal use. You can remove the DRM, format shift, read it on your phone or TV or computer or ebook reader, it is your choice.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by stonetools

If that were the standard, then we should just give up on enforcing any laws against theft.

No, just the ones that encourage theft and hamper the people who don't want to steal.

DRM does not stop people from pirating ebooks. It doesn't even slow them down. That's why I keep using Harry Potter as an example: it was never released as an ebook. But it's available as an illicit ebook to anyone who wants it anyway.

If laws will stop people from stealing, laws will stop people from copying ebooks. Nobody has said that laws are unnecessary, and only someone who was looking for ways to justify certain marketers' existing arrangements, rather than looking at the situation and saying "how is this working, exactly?" would claim that they did. Whether or not laws will be effective is not a part of this discussion.

What we're discussing is technical measures that purportedly prevent people from illicitly copying ebooks. I maintain that they are not effective in the way claimed because a) they do not prevent the illicit copying of ebooks, nor the exchange of such ebooks, and b) they do interfere with the normal and legitimate use of ebooks by their purchasers, inducing those purchasers to step closer to, or over, their actions from those in part 1.

It doesn't stop the bad guys -- they don't even slow them down. Vendor's rep or not, you can look at the darknet the same as we can, and see for yourself. Legal action to prevent this might be effective, but DRM has clearly totally, completely, and utterly failed in that department. DRM will always fail if there is any visible version of a book -- paper, screen-shottable, whatever. It might work if we get books fed directly into our neural implants, but we can worry about that when the time comes. DRM does nothing whatsoever to stop someone who wants to copy a book from copying it, nor does it stop someone who wants to obtain such a copy from obtaining it. Other measures -- ranging from draconian laws to reliance on the honesty of well-treated customers -- might do so, but DRM does not.

It hurts the good guys. Most people just want to be able to buy a book and read it. They don't want to have to understand about file formats, or incompatible devices, or the fact that they've worn out/obsoleted/squashed six Kindles over the years and they can't read their books any more on the seventh. They just want to be able to do with their ebooks what I did with a pbook last night: buy it, take it home, and read it. Or take it off the shelf again, a decade later, and read it again. DRM interferes with that. How many ebook newbies have posted here not understanding why an ebook they bought at Amazon won't work on their Sony, or an ebook from B&N won't work on their Kindle? They don't want to have to register their readers, jump through hoops for their books, and be S.O.L. when the bookstore shuts down (it's happened, and will undoubtedly happen again) or changes formats or whatever. Look at how many people are worried about the Kobo because Borders, which sold it, is circling the drain. Extend to the whole ebook world. People just want to buy a book and read it, and DRM gets in the way of that. DRM hurts the good people -- that supposed 90%.

It doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It doesn't "protect" authors from their customers. It doesn't protect anything, actually, except device lock-in. And only that in the case of people who don't know how to strip DRM from their books, or how to find illicit copies in places we can't post about. Further, it teaches people who just want to read the bloody book how to strip DRM, and where to find "free" books, and some percentage of those will permanently join the ranks of the pirates, losing even more customers for the publishers, when they originally would have been happy to just be able to use the books they bought. It's hurting the wrong people.

So are booksellers too stupid to realize they're hurting the people they want to help, and helping the people they want to hurt? Or do booksellers have some other end in view (device lock-in is the first thing that comes to mind) and are cynically using the "we need DRM to protect the authors" line to encourage customer acceptance of a technology that benefits the sellers, and the sellers only ... if even them?

By the way, I don't have a dog in this fight. I bought my PRS-505 so I could read Project Gutenberg in bed. I do, along with other free PD archives. I also buy DRM-free ebooks from Baen, O'Reilly, Smashwords, and so on. This is not because I have a device I couldn't buy or use DRM-locked ebooks on (I could use the Sony store if I wanted to), nor because I couldn't strip DRM if I needed to (I write programs for fun; I think I could manage a DRM-removal app). It's because I have put my money where my keyboard is, and I refuse to buy DRM-locked ebooks. And no, I don't pirate them, either. I've lived all my life with pbooks, and while space issues have made me far more selective, they're still a very viable option. So I'm not arguing against DRM because it inconveniences me (it doesn't; at worst, I'm still in the same place I was before I bought my ebook reader) nor because I'm afraid of someday being unable to remove it (I don't buy DRM-locked ebooks anyway). It's purely practical -- an outsider's viewpoint, in fact: "Hey, guys, that's not working the way you say it is." What and How are enough for me; I'll leave Why for someone else.

Maybe a publisher's rep?

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

Home Depot goes out of business, sorry for the now non-functioning lock, too bad.

Not quite. You don't have a non-functioning lock; you have a non-functioning house. You are locked out of your house, permanently and forever, because you bought a Home Depot DRM'd lock. There is no way for you to get into your house anymore. Or, in the case we're talking about, your library.

But of course, Borders Home Quarters Home Depot will never go out of business ....

[queentess]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Yet you (and im sure , most people on the forum) still lock your doors. Again, locks WILL stop the casual amatuer. A burglar with a lock pick can easily pick a lock, but then he is a professional-a person who has acquired the special tool and training to break in that way.
Again I think folks on this forum really lose sight of how unaffectedthe average user is by this stuff. Grandma who just bought a Kindle understands that she can buy books in seconds from Amazon. She's perfectly happy with that and does not know- or even want to know-about sideloading, backing your library up to a computer, transferring ebooks between devices, Calibre, etc, etc.
That's a big part of discussions by experts-the ONLY people who are really concerned about DRM

Just wait until the day she purchases a book from Borders and can't get it to work on her Kindle... Or when she (god forbid) wants to check an ebook out of the library and can't with a Kindle.

Originally Posted by stonetools

And yet apparently the authors and publishers see such a connection. Guess they don't know their own businesses like you lot.

If they "knew" their business they'd stop all this BS with trying different methods of when to release ebooks (on release day? 3 months later? 1 year later?) and what to charge for them (hardback price? paperback price?). They're all over the place, trying everything out precisely because they don't know what works yet.

[stonetools]

OK, I asked a staight forward question above and so far no one has answered it or even tried to answer it (although they have been busy trying to point out that a lock is NOT EXACTLY like DRM). Here is the the question again:

Can we assure that writers and publishers can make a good living in a post DRM world?

Before we answer that lets hear what the publishers actually think about DRM (Yes, I know its strange to actually listen to what other side says, but bear with me)

1. Do you think DRM is necessary to protect the sales of ebooks for popular titles?

2. Do you think DRM is an effective check against piracy?

3. Do you think the main benefit of DRM is that it prevents casual sharing?

I was transparent: I told people that my own opinion was “yes”, “no”, “yes”. I am quite certain that whatever I think doesn’t influence any of these people one iota.

Eleven of the 13 agreed with me that DRM is necessary to protect sales. Ten of the 13 agreed with me that DRM is not an effective deterrent to piracy. And 12 of the 13 agreed with me that DRM’s main benefit is to prevent casual sharing!

I don’t know how many DRM opponents have the interest or patience to read this blog, but please take note. It is either disingenuous or unsophisticated (or both) to use “it does nothing to deter piracy” as an argument against DRM. Most of the people supporting the use of DRM know that and agree with you. The news is “dog bites man”. You might as well try to persuade the other side by proving that DRM doesn’t cure cancer. We agree on that as well.

THis was a surprise to me as well, but it does meant that the megabyes of oppobrium visited on the supposed arguments about piracy were wasted. Other surprises:

QUOTE]Two of the four agents said they don’t believe DRM is necessary (at all, or hardly at all) to protect the sales of ebooks. (None of the publishers voted that way.) Four is too small a sample to leap to any conclusions, but it could be that my supposition that publishers promote the universal use of DRM because agents make them do it might be overblown.
[/QUOTE]


So agents (and presumably) authors aren't clamoring for DRM protection-maybe!

One top executive at a Big Six house who is an analytical person and who is a very fact- and data-based thinker reported that “of the key titles of ours that have been pirated, all have been scans or electronic copies of MS, none have been DRM protected eBooks.” (I find this rather startling. It undermines the frequent contention — which I’ve always tended to accept — that DRM is a futile barrier to piracy because it is so easily broken. If that’s true, why wouldn’t the pirated versions publishers are finding not come from jailbroken ebooks? Something’s not adding up here…)

I'm confused too. Apparently, it's scanners , not software, that are the main piracy problem.

The writer (and at least one agent) bnelieves that the main way DRM works to protect sales is to prevent casual sharing, ie. passing your ebook along to friends and family. The agent supported DRM for best sellers alone.
Finally, here's the take from a publisher:

I got my most colorful answer from a publishing executive who believes, as I do, that the problems of piracy and the need for DRM will diminish as we move increasingly to cloud-based ebooks and away from downloadable. In a most provocative turn of phrase, this executive said that he supported DRM for downloadable ebook sales because “if you put The Da Vinci Code out there sans DRM it would be passed around like a 5 dollar whore at a frat party!” But his explanation of the cloud was more suitable for a family audience.

“There isn’t really a piracy problem but there isn’t really an alternative to DRM except for the cloud. The cloud means that you buy a product (NB: I personally would say you “license some content”, not you “buy a product”) and you get to access it on every device that you own — so long as you provide your ownership credentials. The cloud effectively means that you work only within a platform and that platform requires your credentials to access your works — so it is, in effect, DRM — but it really isn’t. That said, in order for this to work, it does need to protect files when they are downloaded — and that is true DRM.

“The whole world is moving away from download and own, so DRM is a moot point — only the library fanatics and the digerati care. The library folks are freaked out by the fact that they have no place in a world that makes all content accessible to single users anywhere, anytime — and they think that DRM is the enemy of the good. The digerati hate DRM because, well, they believe it is hindering their utopian digital realm.”

Wonder if there are any digerati around these parts.

Anyway, I shared this in the interest of promoting informed discussion.

http://www.idealog.com/blog/what-the...-of-the-cloud#

I'd suggest you read the whole thing, then have another crack at my question.

[kennyc]

No here's the real answer.

DRM has been shown to fail in everything from video, to music, to computer games. Why would anyone think it would work for books.

[DiapDealer]

DRM has been shown to fail in everything from video, to music, to computer games. Why would anyone think it would work for books.

Insanity?

[kennyc]

Exactly!

[stonetools]

How many ebook newbies have posted here not understanding why an ebook they bought at Amazon won't work on their Sony, or an ebook from B&N won't work on their Kindle?

I think you are mixing in the problem of clashing device and platform specific formats. We've had that since WAAY before the existence of ereaders and they confuse newbies to this today. Well do I remember the day of three clashing Office formats -Microsoft Office, Perfect Office and Lotus (shudder). And Office for Windows still won't work on a Mac.But that's a bit different than DRM

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Insanity?

Obviously, since the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result!

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I think you are mixing in the problem of clashing device and platform specific formats. We've had that since WAAY before the existence of ereaders and they confuse newbies to this today. Well do I remember the day of three clashing Office formats -Microsoft Office, Perfect Office and Lotus (shudder). And Office for Windows still won't work on a Mac.But that's a bit different than DRM

But in the case of ebooks the solution is simple, remove the DRM and format shift as you see fit, read on the device of your choice.

[jgaiser]

Can we assure that writers and publishers can make a good living in a post DRM world?

We can't. But then they made a pretty decent living before DRM/ebooks with casual lending, used bookstores and pirating paper books with scanners. Why are things different now.