Pan Macmillan: DRM Is Not Evil

[Icarusbop]

Originally Posted by kacir

[rant mode]
I am customer and I am NOT satisfied.
EVERY SINGLE TIME I insert my legally purchased DVD into player I have to watch stupid, *stupid*, *STUPID* warning that I should not steal that DVD. I have already paid for it! I have not stolen it. If it was stolen, the stupid, *stupid*, *STUPID* warning would not be there!
I also hate it when I have to see the advertisements for other movies by the same distributor / DVD publisher that can not be skipped.

When I press "skip" on the remote and all that *MY* DVD player with *MY* legally purchased DVD inside does is to display symbol for forbidden operation I feel irresistible urge to rip the disk or to download ripped image.
[/rant mode]

AAARRRGGHHH man they make me so mad when my DVD's do this!!
However, recently I bought a DVD without the 'Do not steal' video clip on it. Instead, inside the case there was a slip of paper saying' Thanks for not stealing this DVD' (or similar) -this made me feel a lot better, like they appreciated my effort to buy - a much more effective and cheaper, and less obtrusive, method of getting the same message across.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Even ignoring all that, the simplest rule isn't always the best to go by. Leaving products unprotected usually leads to theft... which is exactly what is happening to e-books. That is a simple fact.

No it is not, and for the billionth time copying != theft. Do we really have to trudge through all the studies that show file sharing increases sales? Do we have to, again and again argue the merits of a merit less, ineffectual system that punishes the paying consumer and lets everyone else do as they please?

Companies have to protect their product from loss through theft, or they go out of business, plain and simple. E-book customers (especially those here, on what is possibly the most popular e-book dedicated site in the world) seem to delight in saying "If I can't get it, I'll steal it... it's easy," which only sets off publishers and makes them concerned over loss, making them want to strengthen DRM against "pirating" customers.

Out of the many, many posts I've read on this site, the willing-to-pay and glad-to-pay ebook customer far outweighs the "I'll steal it" poster, which again is a fallacy. Digital products cannot be stolen, they are merely copied. Your real-world comparison between a physical book and an ebook makes no sense and never will.

Acting like the only existent forms of DRM in the world are akin to fixing a watch with a mallet is only being obtuse about the issue. It is simply not true. There are plenty of examples of screwdrivers out there that could do the job to everyone's satisfaction... they just have to be developed for this one industry (about the only one left that hasn't managed to do so).

Nothing obtuse about it. DRM doesn't work. It took the Music industry 10 years to figure it out, but they did in the end. Sales haven't diminished, the files from the DRM-less sites aren't shared any more than those ripped from DRM-less CD's. DRM never worked, it never will work, it's a pointless tech that only satisfies the technologically illiterate and swaddles them in a false sense of security.

But most importantly, even those screwdrivers have to be accepted by the public, instead of constantly whining that any and all DRM is EVIL and demanding unrealistic services from for-profit companies.

I'm not saying publishers don't have to change their expectations of the realities of the market... they do. But so do customers. It's a new day, it's a new product... and we all have to learn a new way to buy it, to use it, and what we can't do with it.

Some level of security (always imperfect, but reasonably effective in mitigating loss) can easily be a part of that, if it is executed properly. But if customers refuse to cooperate, even to the extent of providing useful feedback (which means something more constructive than "it stinks"), the only forms of security publishers will apply will be poorly-designed and overly-harsh, making it harder on all of us than it has to be.

Your whole point relies on the idea that DRM works or somehow stops 'copying' (in your vernacular "theft"). But it doesn't do that. It never has done that, and it's unlikely to perform that function in the future. The Music industry abandoned it as a loss, why push for the same 10 years of frustration in book publishing? It's the definition of insanity to continually repeat the same behavior over and over again and expect different results, is it not?

[Icarusbop]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

E-book customers (especially those here, on what is possibly the most popular e-book dedicated site in the world) seem to delight in saying "If I can't get it, I'll steal it... it's easy,"

I don't think many people here 'delight' in making such statements, my perception is they say 'If you won't provide it for me (ie make it available), I'll take it.' and quite a few still buy the paper version so the author still gets there cut.
True, it's illegal, but at least those (especially the ones who also buy the paper version) are trying to 'do the right thing' and ensure the author gets their bit.

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

E-book customers (especially those here, on what is possibly the most popular e-book dedicated site in the world) seem to delight in saying "If I can't get it, I'll steal it... it's easy," which only sets off publishers and makes them concerned over loss, making them want to strengthen DRM against "pirating" customers.

It's a bit more complicated than that... I think most people here actually want to pay for it. But that's something most publishers don't (want to) see. I also think that most people here won't buy a hardcover just because the ebook version isn't available. And that's again, something most publishers don't (want to) see.

I'd love to "sponsor" one of my favourite authors again, but I simply can't because the books I'd love to buy in ebook format aren't available. So, I went and scanned her books. Officially, I'm not allowed to do that:

All rights reservered. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photcopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Oeps, I've reproduced the book, I'm now "liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages". Naturally, I won't distribute the copy, but reproducing is already forbidden...

I would have loved to safe me the time and trouble and buy the book in ebook format. But I wasn't allowed to do that, so I "stole" this copy...

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Icarusbop

I don't think many people here 'delight' in making such statements, my perception is they say 'If you won't provide it for me (ie make it available), I'll take it.' and quite a few still buy the paper version so the author still gets there cut.
True, it's illegal, but at least those (especially the ones who also buy the paper version) are trying to 'do the right thing' and ensure the author gets their bit.

But is your perception, in fact, the reality? There is no direct evidence of increasing book sales, in fact, they seem to be steadily decreasing with everything else in this economy... so the idea that more people are buying printed books just to turn them into e-books sounds nice, but isn't backed up.

With a dearth of evidence, publishers have no choice but to respond to what they do have... which includes comments from MR members of being willing to go to the darknet. Maybe if those selfsame people were regularly contacting publishers and asking for the e-books they want, instead of regularly posting here that they'll just take them, publishers might react differently.

Readers and publishers are presently in an adversarial relationship. partially borne on a lack of information on both sides. Unless that changes, this problem isn't going to be fixed.

[Icarusbop]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

But is your perception, in fact, the reality?

This statement works both ways.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

There is no direct evidence of increasing book sales, in fact, they seem to be steadily decreasing with everything else in this economy... so the idea that more people are buying printed books just to turn them into e-books sounds nice, but isn't backed up.

Book sales do not necessary need to increase to provide evidence, it is possible for people to not buy more books than they used to, and still digitise the books they do buy.
At the moment the sales of most things are decreasing, regardless of potential copying, on top of reports that sales of books have been decreasing for years before ebooks were starting to become recognised', this has been seen as an icdication thet people are reading less, not stealing more.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

With a dearth of evidence, publishers have no choice but to respond to what they do have... which includes comments from MR members of being willing to go to the darknet. Maybe if those selfsame people were regularly contacting publishers and asking for the e-books they want, instead of regularly posting here that they'll just take them, publishers might react differently.

A lot of members here are very regularly being very vociferous about the un-availability of books they want. If the publishers are reading comments about the darknet here, they will surely also be exposed to all the comments alongside them saying ' I do it because they refuse to supply it to me' - so they should certainly be getting the message.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Readers and publishers are presently in an adversarial relationship. partially borne on a lack of information on both sides. Unless that changes, this problem isn't going to be fixed.

I think the adversarial relationship exists, becasuse the readers feel they are always being constantly accused of theft: Readers see DRM as a statement, that the publishers are not willing to trust them despite many stements that people are willing to support authors. Publishers see the resistance to DRM,as justification to their suspicions that were are all thieves.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Icarusbop

I think the adversarial relationship exists, becasuse the readers feel they are always being constantly accused of theft: Readers see DRM as a statement, that the publishers are not willing to trust them despite many stements that people are willing to support authors. Publishers see the resistance to DRM,as justification to their suspicions that were are all thieves.

The relationship also exists because publishers feel they are being labeled as EVIL, money-grubbing monsters who care not one whit about the customers they hope to sell to. They are constantly accused of being greedy idiots, consumers voice their desire for them to just collapse, and for their employees to find new jobs. Consumers see publishers' resistance to give up on DRM as a sure sign that the pubs are all thieves.

So, as you said, it works both ways.

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

The relationship also exists because publishers feel they are being labeled as EVIL, money-grubbing monsters who care not one whit about the customers they hope to sell to. They are constantly accused of being greedy idiots,

I'm sorry but if I read statements (from publishers) that they won't publish the ebooks because they might "canabalize" on the hard cover sales, yes, I find the money-grubbing... Or if they want to sell so many pbooks before they'll create an ebook, again, yes, they are idiots.

I don't mind if the new bestsellers are prices the same as the hardcover. But I do mind if the new bestsellers are just not brought in ebook because they first want to sell those hardcovers first...

[Barcey]

There is no historical relationship between the publishers and the consumers. Having the distribution chain and retail chain disappear is forcing the relationship. The publishers have shown that they don't understand how to deal with consumers. They are using the tactics they understand and have used well when negotiating with authors and distributors one on one. Lots of vague statements about all the massive costs and complications involved. This works one on one but it doesn't work with consumers.

Amazon understands consumers very well and have done their market research. The publishers are making the same mistake the music business did with Apple. They've made Amazon into the bad guys trying to impose unsustainable pricing when really all they're doing is being the messenger. Based on the success they're having (proprietary business model and all) they got it right and almost two years later the publishers seem to be moving backwards.

[alecE]

When DRM is used to enforce proprietary incompatible formats then yes, it's evil; even worse, it's stupid and short-sighted. I expect the Tower of Babel referred to by JSWolf to eventually disappear. Naturally I'm rooting for epub, but another format may win out (VHS vs. Betamax is an obvious example of how inferior solutions may win out).

I wonder though if the use of DRM to protect revenues will eventually just fizzle out as the ebook-buying population changes from enthusiastic early adopters to "ordinary" consumers who just want to buy, read and sometimes share. Yes, I know the darknet is there, it just isn't part of my life. (Is this what is happening in the digital music market?)

There are other less obvious reasons to dislike DRM - I'm having an entertaining correspondence with Pan Macmillan regarding their title "Rising '44" which has completely mangles the display of accented characters. Without DRM I could have gone in there and fixed it straight off. At least it provides a platform to tell them that DRM is unhelpful.

[fugazied]

Paper may have been a form of DRM back in 1807 or something. The analogy is ridiculous and indicates how skewed your thinking has to be to accept digital DRM as a necessary evil. It's a pain in the backside for consumers, it doesn't stop piracy and in many cases makes people go to the pirate bay rather than buy the DRMed item (the reverse of their intention).

Will the publishers learn NOTHING or what happened with the music and movie industries?

[catsittingstill]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Even ignoring all that, the simplest rule isn't always the best to go by. Leaving products unprotected usually leads to theft... which is exactly what is happening to e-books. That is a simple fact.

That "simple fact" is just flat-out not true.

Baen Books sells all its e-books without DRM of any kind. And they are making a profit. If you ask them nicely, they will probably tell you how.

But in the meantime, please don't spread the untruth that DRM is necessary to keep publishers getting paid for their books. Baen Books proves it is untrue, and as such it is not a constructive contribution to the conversation.

Correct information is absolutely necessary for people to make good decisions.

And the other thing I have been itching to say all along is that DRM usually ends up hurting innocent people (customers who have paid fair and square for their books and then don't get to use them) and doing nothing to stop real criminals (to the extent that unauthorized copiers could be said to be real criminals, but let's go with it for the sake of argument.)

Hurting innocent people while doing nothing to stop real criminals sure looks evil to me.

[Jaime_Astorga]

I don't buy the paper = DRM argument (and no, not just because paper is not digital). Paper books being unable to be shared with all your friends is an INHERENT limitation of the medium. Nobody "crippled" paper to tone down its ability to be shared to an extent considered "sensible and sustainable;" it's just what you get when you buy physical objects. However, in a networked world (whether that network be the internet or sneakernet), digital copies of works have the inherent property of being copyable and distributable to a circle of friends for an infinitesimal cost. DRM is designed to cripple this ability, not content with merely reducing the functions of e-books to that of their dead-tree cousins, often goes further and eviscerates whatever other functions the providing company believes it will be able to get away with while still getting a high number of people to buy their books, in the name of maximizing profit.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by kacir

[rant mode]
I am customer and I am NOT satisfied.
EVERY SINGLE TIME I insert my legally purchased DVD into player I have to watch stupid, *stupid*, *STUPID* warning that I should not steal that DVD. I have already paid for it! I have not stolen it. If it was stolen, the stupid, *stupid*, *STUPID* warning would not be there!
I also hate it when I have to see the advertisements for other movies by the same distributor / DVD publisher that can not be skipped.

When I press "skip" on the remote and all that *MY* DVD player with *MY* legally purchased DVD inside does is to display symbol for forbidden operation I feel irresistible urge to rip the disk or to download ripped image.
[/rant mode]

But that is not DRM. That is something completely different. DRM is what prevents you from putting that DVD into your DVD drive and using Windows Explorer to copy the files off of the DVD.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by NightGeometry

I actually love watching trailers, one of those strange likes.

What really really annoys me, and seems just *stupid* is that a DVD starts, I force it past the trailers because I want to watch whatever is on the disk, and then later I can't actually watch those trailers because there is no menu item for them. This is the case on a number of DVD's I have. I just can't get my head around why anyone would do that.

Sorry for the interuption, I'll go back to lurking now.

What is worse and I have seen it on some Disney DVDs is that they force you to have to play all of the trailers. No way to get past them. That is even more annoying. At least with your annoyance, I can pop out the DVD, pop it back in and watch the trailers if I want.