Moral and Ethical Norms Regarding Book Sharing

[barryem]

The one copy vs multiple copy thing is an issue if there are lots of multiple copies. But if I lend my paperback to my friend or my spare Kindle with the same book on it I'm reading on my Kindle the author/publisher isn't affected by the difference. That's an issue in name only.

Lending my spare Kindle with the book on it means we might both read the book at the same time. Or not. Either way we both read the same book. If it's paper we're just inconvenienced a little more. The publisher gains nothing from our inconvenience.

The real solution to all this in the long run is for publishers/sellers/authors to assume people are honest, which we mostly are, and leave them alone. Then when there is a problem they can deal with it. That's where law is effective. The various systems in place now just don't work and cause a lot of problems, both for us users and for the publishers and book sellers.

Barry

[issybird]

I think most of the moral and ethical issues arise because people try to force analogies that don't work.

[crane3]

Originally Posted by issybird

I think most of the moral and ethical issues arise because people try to force analogies that don't work.

Same applies to the DRM malware virus; it is a virus as it stops people doing legitimate thing.

I have now encountered the "too many activations" 'error' msg when trying to add the Adobe DRM id to the Aldiko app so I can download an ebook from the public library.

Googling, I find the problem was in a thread at Adobe's 'community forum' starting around 2010 & looks to be still occurring. DRM should not have a limit to how many activations were made if it was legitimate; none of DRM business on how many times a person install/uninstalls an app.

I do not remember where, but did see a reference to Overdrive using "anonymous" as an id which appears to be without limits.

Another reason for getting rid for DRM.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by Thrasher

How about lending an ePub from the library and stripping the DRM because you were not able to finish it in 21 days and you want to finish it?

I consider this like time shifting with VCRs. Of course, if you keep the book, or give it to someone else, that is a different story. But if I have 5 books that come off the waiting list at once, I don't consider taking more than 21 days to read them to be unethical or immoral.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by crane3

Same applies to the DRM malware virus; it is a virus as it stops people doing legitimate thing.

It's simply wrong to call it either "malware" or a "virus"; it's neither. Even if you are against the principle of DRM, you're doing your cause no favours by using such inaccurate terms to describe it.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

I consider this like time shifting with VCRs. Of course, if you keep the book, or give it to someone else, that is a different story. But if I have 5 books that come off the waiting list at once, I don't consider taking more than 21 days to read them to be unethical or immoral.

I've had that happen; waiting list books often arrive at inopportune times, and sometimes those books have long waiting lists after me. So I can be strictly ethical and have several books sit unread for the bulk of the loan time while other patrons are waiting, or I can "time-shift" for the benefit of the next people in line. Is doing the latter a horrible sin?

[issybird]

Originally Posted by crane3

Same applies to the DRM malware virus; it is a virus as it stops people doing legitimate thing.

I think you rather prove my point. The use of the word legitimate only arises from the forced analogy I mentioned.

[crane3]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's simply wrong to call it either "malware" or a "virus"; it's neither. Even if you are against the principle of DRM, you're doing your cause no favours by using such inaccurate terms to describe it.

The term malware is correct as it disabled my borrowing a book from the library. The "copy protection" of DVD, Blu-ray or CDs are playable on any manufacturer's device whereas the DRM disallows use without justification & lies about the claim that activation of DRM on a "device" will allow access.

DRM is a virus as it is also infects the physical device since it renders the tablet unable to use a paid app for its functions.

[HarryT]

I'm sorry, but this is abject nonsense.

[PeterT]

The "Too many activations' is normally resolved via contact with Adobe support.

[crane3]

Originally Posted by PeterT

The "Too many activations' is normally resolved via contact with Adobe support.

Not true as seen in the postings at the Adobe site. One person stated that the phone contact Adobe "support" said to state the problem in the Adobe community forum; still unresolved.

Did read that Adobe tech "support" claims that the problem is the publisher or device maker as they dictate what is the "limit". And that if software app is uninstalled without deleting the DRM, then the DRM stays & is counted if the app is reinstalled. A problem for those who updates the OS frequently with open sourced like cyanogen/llineageos.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by crane3

Same applies to the DRM malware virus; it is a virus as it stops people doing legitimate thing.

I have now encountered the "too many activations" 'error' msg when trying to add the Adobe DRM id to the Aldiko app so I can download an ebook from the public library.

Googling, I find the problem was in a thread at Adobe's 'community forum' starting around 2010 & looks to be still occurring. DRM should not have a limit to how many activations were made if it was legitimate; none of DRM business on how many times a person install/uninstalls an app.

I do not remember where, but did see a reference to Overdrive using "anonymous" as an id which appears to be without limits.

Another reason for getting rid for DRM.

Does DRM give others my information?
Does DRM infect my computer?

If the answer is no, then it is neither malware nor a virus.

Your argument would hold more water if you used better analogies.

Ok, so you can't read a book with it. That would be an obstacle or a roadblock.
Not virus or malware.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by crane3

Not true as seen in the postings at the Adobe site. One person stated that the phone contact Adobe "support" said to state the problem in the Adobe community forum; still unresolved.

Did read that Adobe tech "support" claims that the problem is the publisher or device maker as they dictate what is the "limit". And that if software app is uninstalled without deleting the DRM, then the DRM stays & is counted if the app is reinstalled. A problem for those who updates the OS frequently with open sourced like cyanogen/llineageos.

Oh so this ONE person is the only other one to have a problem?
Have you actually tried support?

I read somewhere that people that use very wrong words are not taken seriously.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by Catlady

I've had that happen; waiting list books often arrive at inopportune times, and sometimes those books have long waiting lists after me. So I can be strictly ethical and have several books sit unread for the bulk of the loan time while other patrons are waiting, or I can "time-shift" for the benefit of the next people in line. Is doing the latter a horrible sin?

I consider breaking DRM for sharing or keeping to be unethical and immoral, but time-shifting doesn't bother me. The way libraries are set up, with wait times in months, seems to encourage such behavior. Again, we are not keeping anything or sharing it with others.

[nabsltd]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Pointing out that watermarking and other forms of 'social DRM' is not DRM feels tiresome and nitpicky.

The most important thing that makes something DRM is the "management" part that allows a content provider to remove access to content you have already paid for and have a copy of on a machine that is not directly controlled by the content provider. Without that, it's not DRM.

Related to that, if different types of rights can't be managed (e.g., open, print, loan/limited copy, etc.), it's not DRM.