Sony Reader Lives on with Rowling!

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by charleski

Your entire rant has been nothing more than a strawman argument. If you truly held these concerns you would not buy anything over the Internet, and you certainly wouldn't be using an insecure cloud service to store personal files.

I think I've already explained that I use the cloud storage because I'm comfortable with the security measures I've put in place. There is a non-zero chance that my books could get stolen, but I think I've made a good faith effort to protect them.

The difference is that if someone steals a Baen book from me and an HP book from me, one of those could be traced back to me and I would be unable to prove that I wasn't the one who loaded it to the torrent site where it was found by the Pottermore people. I'm not willing to gamble with jail time or a hefty fine just because some jerk hacked my Dropbox account.

I'm sorry that you think I'm ranting strawman arguments (am I ranting? I thought I was pretty calm over here, but maybe you know something about me that I don't...), but I think I've satisfactorily conveyed why the HP DRM is very different from, say, the Kobo (Adobe) DRM. Apparently you disagree; I'm okay with that.

[Latinandgreek]

I believe that I've read that the books are going to be sold in .epub format.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I believe that I've read that the books are going to be sold in .epub format.

Watermarked epubs should be interesting. How'll they do that, put a code inside the metadata? Which could only be removed by someone who knows how to unzip files & edit html?

Watermarks are likely to be not-very-useful if they're not visible to the end user. Well. Not useful in the "prevent unauthorized copies" sense. If there's no visible watermark, someone will blithely upload the files to torrents & filesharing sites, and Rowling will be within her rights to track down & sue that person--but the files will already be spreading.

[6charlong]

Something I can't understand in these discussions. Supposing I stole someone's book reader. Why would I want to upload their books to Torrent?

And if I wanted to download a book from Torrent, why would I want to choose the Harry Potter book with someone else's name stamped on it? I think I'd want one of the older ones that had nothing of the sort attached. It seems foolish to pick one that shouts: Thief!

Never having used Torrent I don't know the answers to these kind of questions but the whole premise of this thread just all seems kind of illogical to me.

[speakingtohe]

I would like to point out that many online venders now take purchased (prepaid) credit cards. Amazon does I am sure.
Many stores will let you use these cards as partial payment (so you can use up those last few dollars and cents).

Pretty safe method of online shopping for purchases under $200.

I doubt DRM will go away in the near future despite protests, boycotts etc. My 86 year old mother (proud owner of a Kindle 3) wouldn't know what DRM is if it came up and bit her in the bum. And if she did know she wouldn't care. She once lent her kindle to a friend so that her friend could read a book she had, but suffered severe anxiety till she got it back.

I do believe, perhaps mistakenly, that publishers/venders are trying to find more reasonable means to allow purchasers to lend books to others in a legitimate and responsible manner and I am sure they will eventually succeed.

As for being treated like a thief, well those who are totally without sin, probably wouldn't notice unless they were accused on a personal level.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by 6charlong

Something I can't understand in these discussions. Supposing I stole someone's book reader. Why would I want to upload their books to Torrent?

For the same reason you'd want to share a movie with friends, or offer to loan your music CDs for someone's party: because you thought they'd appreciate it.

The impulse to share art that we like is pretty much a universal human desire. Whether we have a legal or moral right to do so is another matter entirely.

And if I wanted to download a book from Torrent, why would I want to choose the Harry Potter book with someone else's name stamped on it? I think I'd want one of the older ones that had nothing of the sort attached. It seems foolish to pick one that shouts: Thief!

Never having used Torrent I don't know the answers to these kind of questions

Imagine two torrent listings: one says "HARRY POTTER EBOOKS" and has:
HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERERS STONE.PDF,
HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERERS STONE.EPUB
HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERERS STONE.MOBI,
HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN.PDF,
... and so on. It has books through Deathly Hallows in epub, pdf and mobi format.

Another says "HARRY POTTER EBOOKS COMPLETE SET INCL EXTRAS," and it has:
J.K. Rowling Harry Potter 1 Harry Potter & Sorcerer's Stone.epub
through
J.K. Rowing Harry Potter 7 Harry Potter & Deathly Hallows.epub
and
J.K. Rowing Harry Potter Quidditch Through the Ages.epub
J.K. Rowing Harry Potter Tales of Beedle the Bard.epub

Which one do you take? (Well *you* don't take either. But if you wished to be "safe," which one is better?)

All that can be seen on torrents is filenames, and sometimes, even that's unavailable that because the only file inside the torrent is "Harry Potter ebooks.zip", with no list of contents. Sometimes, the uploader mentions details: "these books were scanned with [device] and are the 3rd version of the proofread files," or "no pics, sorry," or "UK version not US version." But sometimes the only info available is the filename.

See notes on Exploiting Peer-to-Peer Networking: I have lost all faith in humanity. (Link contains text that some employers might be unhappy to see on their computers.)

[OtterBooks]

Originally Posted by 6charlong

And if I wanted to download a book from Torrent, why would I want to choose the Harry Potter book with someone else's name stamped on it?

Books don't get torrented with DRM still in place. It gets stripped first (yes there is probably the occasional buffoon who doesn't). Leaving DRM attached would be extremely foolish for the uploader, even if it was someone else's personal information. I doubt watermarked ebooks will find their way onto torrent servers with DRM in place, any more than they do now. I guess ya never know, though.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I believe that I've read that the books are going to be sold in .epub format.

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-p...rprise-winner/

Apple is losing the audiobooks and Amazon isn't getting eBooks.

—Apple: Pottermore.com is also going to be the exclusive place to buy Harry Potter digital audiobooks—which are currently sold on iTunes. The Financial Times reports that those editions “will be removed and sold solely on the Pottermore site when it opens to the public in October, people familiar with the business said. As a result, Ms. Rowling’s audio sales contract with Apple will in effect be terminated, the sources confirmed.”

—Amazon: As we mentioned yesterday, Pottermore.com is not a good thing for Amazon. Amazon currently does not support EPUB, the format in which the Harry Potter e-books will most likely be released. But if they want Kindle owners to be able to read Harry Potter, they will have to add EPUB support despite the fact that they stand to make no money from the sales of the e-books because Rowling is selling them directly. It’s not a great position for Amazon, which says its goal is to make the Kindle Store “the best bookstore in the world,” in the words of Jeff Bezos at the Amazon shareholders meeting earlier this month. Bezos described this as a “straightforward,” “simple-minded” approach that “seems like what our customers would want.” Well, Kindle owners will definitely want to be able to read the Harry Potter e-books, and Amazon risks losing market share to the Barnes & Noble (NYSE: BKS) Nook, Kobo and other e-readers that support EPUB if for some reason it takes a stand against Pottermore.com.

The FT reports that Sony is “developing related products, including a themed version of its Sony reader.” Who knows if anyone wants a special Harry Potter e-reader, but this could be an opportunity to reach out in particular to younger kids who might like that sort of thing. (I’m thinking magic wand stylus…) And no major brand currently offers an e-reader aimed specifically at children.

If this is all true, Amazon is going to have to go ePub or risk losing sales left and right as people want the HP eBooks and since they won't work on a Kindle, that will be one big strike for Amazon.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by 6charlong

Something I can't understand in these discussions. Supposing I stole someone's book reader. Why would I want to upload their books to Torrent?

And if I wanted to download a book from Torrent, why would I want to choose the Harry Potter book with someone else's name stamped on it? I think I'd want one of the older ones that had nothing of the sort attached. It seems foolish to pick one that shouts: Thief!

Never having used Torrent I don't know the answers to these kind of questions but the whole premise of this thread just all seems kind of illogical to me.

And part of the idea of a digital watermark is that you don't see it, unless you're specifically looking for it. You'd never know it was there if you simply just downloaded it.

PS, your use of the word "Torrent" is a bit off. The service is "BitTorrent", but but how it is designed, with no central server, you don't really search and download in a traditional manner. Anyone can make a torrent (which this is actually the correct usage of the term "you use a torrent", or "download from a torrent", with torrent not being a proper noun), that anyone else can use. You get a file that has the info on where to connect to, and you download parts from everyone else who is downloading, or has downloaded. Also, please don't think of all things on bit torrent as being illegal. There are many torrent trackers (websites that offer the torrent files for searching and downloading) that offer only legal content. BitTorrent technology is actually built into many legal game and movie subscription movie services, because it helps lower hosting costs to the company (instead of having one giant server and connection, you can have a half dozen that are a fraction of the size and cost, and the end users see no difference, plus some companies also offload some of the hosting onto their customers, so you use less bandwidth. Smaller systems, smaller connections, and lower bandwidth usage). Many open source projects use it to distribute their works as well.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Watermarked epubs should be interesting. How'll they do that, put a code inside the metadata? Which could only be removed by someone who knows how to unzip files & edit html?

Watermarks are likely to be not-very-useful if they're not visible to the end user. Well. Not useful in the "prevent unauthorized copies" sense. If there's no visible watermark, someone will blithely upload the files to torrents & filesharing sites, and Rowling will be within her rights to track down & sue that person--but the files will already be spreading.

It is insanely easy to hide data in ways that it isn't visible. Think of it as meta-metadata. Metadata, as you normally think of it, is data that doesn't display visually but is still in an area of the file that you can easily parse through. Now, say if the file's information (and traditional metadata) says the the end of file is at a specific spot, there's nothing that restricts you from putting info in past that spot. Certain image files are really bad about doing that. You can have an image that opens up and appears perfectly normal, but it has extra stuff shoehorned in to where your image editors cannot see or touch it.

[6charlong]

Thank you for helping me understand how digital piracy works. I was underestimating the complexity. I see why there is no way to forcibly stop digital piracy. I still think JK Rowling’s approach of rewarding honesty is a better approach to controlling it.

I think it was Hannah Arndt who writes (I’m paraphrasing) that morality is when you do the right thing when it is inconvenient or a little painful.

[stonetools]

THIS is the best article I've seen on the significance of this move by Rowling. Money quote:

Rowling is pointedly eschewing all major e-book sellers while boosting the e-book market at the same time. Apple won't get its 30 percent cut of the millions of Harry Potter e-books that are guaranteed to sell. At the same time, neither will Amazon, Waterstone or anyone else beyond Rowling's print publishers Bloomsbury and Scholastic, which will get a share of the revenue, and Sony, which is a partner in the endeavor.

Furthermore, Rowling's smart business move to hold onto her digital-publishing rights could spread to other top-selling authors that are already mainstays in iBooks. While not all authors have the financial might that Rowling does, it could tempt other authors, such as Nora Roberts, Suzanne Collins, James Patterson and the estate of Stieg Larsson, to reconsider their digital-publishing options. All of these authors are members of Amazon's so-called Kindle Million Club, those who have sold a million or more e-books for the Kindle, and they bring in a hefty chunk of change for Apple as well.

If Rowling's move works, it means more power for big name authors at the expense of the middlemen. Dunno what that exactly means for the future of ebooks. Read the whole thing.

[stonetools]

Watermarks are likely to be not-very-useful if they're not visible to the end user. Well. Not useful in the "prevent unauthorized copies" sense. If there's no visible watermark, someone will blithely upload the files to torrents & filesharing sites, and Rowling will be within her rights to track down & sue that person--but the files will already be spreading.

Sounds like an irrefutable argument for a visible watermark. Hopefully, it will give people pause before they email it to all their friends. Now, will it work like that? Well, let's hope.
If it doesn't, Rowling may not bother running around suing people-she might just shut down the whole ebook thing.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

It is insanely easy to hide data in ways that it isn't visible. Think of it as meta-metadata. Metadata, as you normally think of it, is data that doesn't display visually but is still in an area of the file that you can easily parse through. Now, say if the file's information (and traditional metadata) says the the end of file is at a specific spot, there's nothing that restricts you from putting info in past that spot. Certain image files are really bad about doing that. You can have an image that opens up and appears perfectly normal, but it has extra stuff shoehorned in to where your image editors cannot see or touch it.

I know it'd be easy to put a hidden watermark in; I wasn't sure how useful that'd be, unless Rowling plans on getting rich(er) by prosecuting teenager for sharing files.

But then it occurred to me that they could put in two kinds of watermarks: a hidden bit of metadata for tracking bootlegs, and a section of the front page that says "This ebook belongs to [username], who bought it on [date]."

A site with a single focus can afford to customize the epubs like that; a simple script could add the buyer's name. That would encourage sales among people who already have the unauthorized versions, because this way they'll get a personal copy. It could even convince people who'd gotten a copy from a friend or family member to buy their own.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If this is all true, Amazon is going to have to go ePub or risk losing sales left and right as people want the HP eBooks and since they won't work on a Kindle, that will be one big strike for Amazon.

This is, of course, not true. Which is why Rowling said that the ebooks "will be compatible with all devices."

Articles like this were speculation that ignored Rowlings' own statements, assumed that the e-books would have ADE drm, and then concluded that they wouldn't be available on the Kindle because Kindle doesn't use ADE DRM.

Pretty stupid in light of Rowlings' own words, of course.