Ethics and legalities of format shifting

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

The problem with this is that you don't buy a book, just a license for a file that is handled in a similar way to a paper book.
If you want a second paper book, you have to pay for it again. You can of course photocopy it, then only you have permission to read the original and the copy at the same time.
The moment you pass one of these on to someone else, you must destroy the other copy.
I know that hardly anywhere else is so much stolen as from EReader owners, because hardly anyone pays for the file copies actually used.
And I allow myself to consider those who do this consciously as thieves.

You have the most extreme interpretation I've ever come across. How you think I haven't paid for a book when I've given money to the publisher in return for a licence to read the book, I can't really imagine.

DRM is intended to prevent people giving copies of digital goods to all and sundry, thus depriving authors and publishers of their income. It was never intended to prevent people reading their own purchased books (although that is a common outcome).

[Gardenman]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Me, I have no interest whatsoever in reading my books in different apps. I have them all in Calibre anyway, for backup purposes, so conversion to a specific format takes just one additional click. And I send them to my chosen device in bulk, also with just one click. No fiddling around with different apps and their settings.

Me too. I may fiddle with settings sometimes just to check them out. But not otherwise.

[JSWolf]

And there is no different between multiple devices registered to the same account for being able to read the same eBooks or sharing the eBooks with those same people.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

No, it isn't.

The article you have quoted from is from 2014. In 2015 the change it mentions was overturned by judicial review.

It is illegal to format shift in the UK.

And how many people ANYWHERE have been or will be prosecuted for breaking DRM keys / removing DRM / format shifting / making backups etc purely for personal use, not publishing the method or sharing /selling the content?

No rights holder will sue (copyright violation) because they have to demonstrate loss, there is none on content legitimately purchased and used personally. Also they'd not want the bad publicity
No police force / prosecutor will bring it to court either under a criminal charge on a supposed technical issue when there is zero evidence of any intent to republish/redistribute/share.

There is real piracy, mostly by criminals or commercial organisations. The idea that any private individual removing DRM and format shifting for personal consumption of stuff they actually bought would be sued or prosecuted is fantasy. And there are vested interests that don't want such court cases as it might actually unravel DRM. There is no basis for DRM other than to control the customer. It has almost no effect on piracy.

[JSWolf]

Lets say you own a Kindle.That Kindle breaks or the battery has worn out. So you decide you would like to get a Kobo instead.

Do you feel trapped by Amazon because it's not legal to remove the DRM whee you live or do you just remove the DRM and buy the Kobo you want? Me, I would buy the Kobo and remove the DRM to read on my Kobo.

When I had my Sony Reader, I did buy eBooks in MS Reader (LIT) format because I was able to remove the DRM.

@ottischwenk, when Microsoft shut down their DRM servers, all the MS Reader (LIT) eBooks that had DRM were then unable to be read. Lots of people lost access to legally purchased eBooks. When Amazon stopped selling eBooks (before the Kindle) when someone needed to update the DRM in order to be able to read the legally purchased eBooks, they could not and lost access to their legally purchased eBooks. But if the DRM was removed, there would have been no loss of legally purchased content. How would you feel if you lost all of your eBooks because you can no longer read them because of the DRM?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

In all these cases, circumvention of technological measures for personal use is a civil infringement, with many exceptions. The copyright holder would need to take the infringer to court, and show that none of the many exceptions applied, and (I think) that there were actual damages.

Ethically, I see nothing wrong in removing DRM for personal use.

Exactly. They have to prove damages, at the simplest level, lost sales. So only a completely idiotic publisher that has lost their senses would sue. They'd have to prove the intent was to redistribute! They'd have to pay their legal team and all costs. No criminal case is involved*

At the worst such a court case might expose how DRM is actually incompatible with Copyright. It doesn't stop piracy, it's purely to control the customer. It removes all fair use and locks the material potentially forever, or in the case of DRM that needs a live server potentially cheats the customer. DRM is actually immoral.
See also Deere Tractors, Plays For Sure, Original Mobi DRM, and IoT security, heating, remote controls and HiFi.

* Note:
People have an idea that Criminal is more severe than Civil. Actually with pirating Cable TV or Satellite in Ireland the maximum Criminal conviction is up to €6000 and / or six months prison, not sure of the details, as a conviction for Theft of Service.
Instead the content providers bring a Civil suit. They sue. The customers of the facilitators usually have to pay the lost revenue for the period plus costs. But the actual providers of the pirating set boxes or card sharing systems have all their computers & phones and stock seized and typically damages start at about the €100,000 plus all costs.

Compare this with a private individual that format shifts ebook, DVD, BD, paper book, CD etc they purchased for personal use and there is no evidence that they ever sold or gave away any copies ever? Where is the copyright violation of publishers rights, the damages or criminal activity?

OTH, someone gets an ARC of a new book on paper, cuts off the spine, scans it, maybe OCRs. They upload it either for free to many sites or until recently even put it on the playstore via Google books. The more popular a book is the easier it is to get a pirate copy. Those people do sometimes get caught and sued. Rarely a criminal prosecution. Films / TV is now trivial to pirate. Such a lot of money wasted on HDCP royalties, DVD & BD Region protection an the immoral DMCA.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

OTH, someone gets an ARC of a new book on paper, cuts off the spine, scans it, maybe OCRs. They upload it either for free to many sites or until recently even put it on the playstore via Google books. The more popular a book is the easier it is to get a pirate copy. Those people do sometimes get caught and sued. Rarely a criminal prosecution. Films / TV is now trivial to pirate. Such a lot of money wasted on HDCP royalties, DVD & BD Region protection an the immoral DMCA.

It's very easy to buy a DVD/BR/4K-BR player that can be made region free. Then you can watch discs from anywhere. There is software that can copy the contents of a DVD/BR/4K-BR and remove the DRM and allow you to write it back to a blank disc.

The harder the content providers make it to use legally purchased content because of DRM, the more people will pirate it. I remember some games that were so locked up that they didn't work all that well on a lot of computers. There were more copies downloaded then bought because of that.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

And I allow myself to consider those who do this consciously as thieves.

Hmm AFAIK most of the active members here on MR do this, occasionally at least. The question then arises, why are you hanging out with such wicked villains in such a den of iniquity?

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

How would you feel if you lost all of your eBooks because you can no longer read them because of the DRM?

He already said he wouldn't care.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Those devices have died long ago. Fictionwise has died. There's no way to download fresh copies, even if there were still devices that provided MOBI PIDs.

What is this excuse?
If a paper book has died (moldy, burned), you have to buy it again if you want to read it again.
Or if the paper book is no longer available, then you can no longer buy or read it

[Gardenman]

Also no one has brought up that in many cases even if you do buy the book the author does not paid anything. The author has gotten a lump sum up front and that is all they get. So format shifting does not hurt the author.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I did find such links for USA, Canada and UK laws, and gave them.

Long outdated and no longer valid.

[Gardenman]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Also very easy. If you read on two different types of devices (e.g. Kindle and Kobo), you need two different files - thus two licenses. And if you only bought one, then you withhold the amount for the second.Simply by removing DRM for whatever reason, redistribution is made possible.
And that is against the law, at least in the EU, and also punishable.
In addition, any change to the file is a violation of copyright law and a conversion from xxx to yyy means a file change.
And even if it isn't discovered, it doesn't change the facts.

If having the ability to do something bad - even if you do not do it, means you will be punished. I am glad I do not live in the EU.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Gardenman

If having the ability to do something bad - even if you do not do it, means you will be punished. I am glad I do not live in the EU.

Of course no one has been or will be punished for removing the DRM from their personal purchases.

[Gardenman]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Of course no one has been or will be punished for removing the DRM from their personal purchases.

I know that. I was talking to ottischwenk. He seems to think so.