My perspective on buying books with DRM

[disconnected]

For me, I guess it's "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't.”

Currently I only buy ebooks with removable DRM so, while I dislike the concept of DRM, it doesn't inconvenience me much.

I don't think I'm overly paranoid, but the idea of invisible tracking capability inside my ebooks doesn't appeal to me.

[eschwartz]

Despite the fact that it can only track where your books appear on the public internet?

[shalym]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

If in certain parts of the world, such events are abnormally common, I stand corrected.

In that case, giving your computer to a repairman is gross negligence and anyone who does so is culpable for aiding and abetting piracy.

You're kidding, right? So in your world, anyone who isn't capable of fixing their own computer is "culpable for aiding and abetting piracy"?

Shari

[eschwartz]

No, only the ones who give their computer to someone they know is most likely to pirate all the stuff they have decided to leave on their computer. I refuse to absolve them of responsibility for their actions on the grounds of needing their computer fixed.

I will grant that they are eligible for the Ostrich defense. Also, the likelihood of any court of law ever convicting anyone of digital piracy is not very large.

But yes, my personal opinion is: Guilty As Hell.
Idiocy is not an excuse.

From the sound of it, in certain parts of the world you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who regards the matter as illegal or immoral anyway, even if you yourself did it deliberately, so it is rather a moot point.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Being able to easily trace a person who pirated (ie "shared") a book seems to me to be an extremely desirable thing.



This is one of the aims of watermarking.

Couldn't it be considered cost prohibitive (at least at present) to track a pirated book back to whomever pirated it to begin with? I mean the pirate steals it and uploads it somewhere, then someone comes along, downloads it and passes it on via another upload etc. so that the original pirate could be anywhere in the world.

[eschwartz]

Well, yes, that is kind of the point of watermarking.

Tracing the download to the server that served it, going through logs to find where it came from first, and tracing it back through several rounds of this, is extremely cost-prohibitive. That is why watermarking identifies the purchaser.

[disconnected]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Despite the fact that it can only track where your books appear on the public internet?

Stuff happens........

My laptop, ereader, tablet, or phone could be stolen.

Sugarsync could be hacked.

Amazon, or much more likely Kobo, could mix up my transactions with those of someone else.

The NSA might..... well, probably not

[svenlind]

Originally Posted by disconnected

Stuff happens........

My laptop, ereader, tablet, or phone could be stolen.

Sugarsync could be hacked.

Amazon, or much more likely Kobo, could mix up my transactions with those of someone else.

The NSA might..... well, probably not

Well I do consider watermarking a fair method of DRM.

But I am sufficiently paranoid about my files being stolen. I have therefore pincodes on my portable devices.

On my computers I have all my sensitive stuff, including the Calibre Library, in a decrypted area on the harddisk.

This area can be set up to function as a virtual harddisk, that you log on to during startup.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by svenlind

On my computers I have all my sensitive stuff, including the Calibre Library, in a decrypted area on the harddisk.

I think you perhaps mean "encrypted", rather than "decrypted"?

[RobertDDL]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Which is nevertheless paranoia, however much one might argue that paranoia is justified.

Correct, I think such people are (usually) paranoia nuts.
I don't see where mental retardation/psychotics enters into the matter though.

In the ICD-10 you will find a number of diagnoses that involve "paranoia" or "paranoid": F20.0 (Paranoid schizophrenia), F21 (Schizotypal disorder), F22.0 (Delusional disorder), F22.8 (Other persistent delusional disorders), F23.3 (Other acute predominantly delusional psychotic disorders), F24 (Induced delusional disorder) and F60.0 (Paranoid personality disorder). While the terms "psychosis" and "psychotic" are somewhat shunned by modern psychiatry, these diagnoses still fall within what is thought to be psychotic in general parlance. And "nuts" I understand to refer to reduced mental capabilities? But, if you say you mean "paranoia nut" to be a term of endearment, I'll forgive you and we'll stay friends

[RobertDDL]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Despite the fact that it can only track where your books appear on the public internet?

Not necessarily. Any reading device that phones home (a Kindle, an Android app, etc.) could, in theory, report the watermarks of any book read or stored on this device, couldn't it?

[shalym]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

No, only the ones who give their computer to someone they know is most likely to pirate all the stuff they have decided to leave on their computer. I refuse to absolve them of responsibility for their actions on the grounds of needing their computer fixed.

I will grant that they are eligible for the Ostrich defense. Also, the likelihood of any court of law ever convicting anyone of digital piracy is not very large.

But yes, my personal opinion is: Guilty As Hell.
Idiocy is not an excuse.

From the sound of it, in certain parts of the world you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who regards the matter as illegal or immoral anyway, even if you yourself did it deliberately, so it is rather a moot point.

So in the case of PandathePanda, what should be done when the computer needs repair? Since the statement was that "If you take your computer in to be fixed you've got a 60-90% chance that your music/books/tv series/movies/games on your pc being copied, and that's with a repairer and not even a thief." a person couldn't take it to someone to get it fixed, since there's a very good chance that their books/games/videos/music will be stolen. Since they're taking it to someone for repair, it can be assumed that they don't know how to wipe the drive, or possibly even how to encrypt it. So being computer ignorant is a crime now?

I do believe that watermarking can be a viable method of DRM, but seriously...calling a person "culpable for aiding and abetting piracy" because their files got stolen when the computer was taken to a shop for repair? That doesn't seem like blaming the victim to you?

Shari

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by RobertDDL

In the ICD-10 you will find a number of diagnoses that involve "paranoia" or "paranoid": F20.0 (Paranoid schizophrenia), F21 (Schizotypal disorder), F22.0 (Delusional disorder), F22.8 (Other persistent delusional disorders), F23.3 (Other acute predominantly delusional psychotic disorders), F24 (Induced delusional disorder) and F60.0 (Paranoid personality disorder). While the terms "psychosis" and "psychotic" are somewhat shunned by modern psychiatry, these diagnoses still fall within what is thought to be psychotic in general parlance. And "nuts" I understand to refer to reduced mental capabilities? But, if you say you mean "paranoia nut" to be a term of endearment, I'll forgive you and we'll stay friends

I generally consider paranoia to be a form of foolishness, not insanity or other illness. I am aware that it can be a mental illness -- can != must.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by RobertDDL

Not necessarily. Any reading device that phones home (a Kindle, an Android app, etc.) could, in theory, report the watermarks of any book read or stored on this device, couldn't it?

I suppose in theory that is true. But any reading app which does that would be an ecosystem app and those are not typically used with sideloaded books.

And unless there is considerably more unity than I think in the BWM cartel, the watermarks would only be seen by the people who made the app, as opposed to the people who designed and keep a database of the watermarks in question.

Either way, tracing through reader devices is not likely to see anything other than books purchased from the tracker. Which is silly, because they don't need watermarks to do that.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by shalym

So in the case of PandathePanda, what should be done when the computer needs repair? Since the statement was that "If you take your computer in to be fixed you've got a 60-90% chance that your music/books/tv series/movies/games on your pc being copied, and that's with a repairer and not even a thief." a person couldn't take it to someone to get it fixed, since there's a very good chance that their books/games/videos/music will be stolen. Since they're taking it to someone for repair, it can be assumed that they don't know how to wipe the drive, or possibly even how to encrypt it. So being computer ignorant is a crime now?

I do believe that watermarking can be a viable method of DRM, but seriously...calling a person "culpable for aiding and abetting piracy" because their files got stolen when the computer was taken to a shop for repair? That doesn't seem like blaming the victim to you?

Shari

How odd, I think I already stated my opinions on the matter...
I suppose what you really meant to say was "What if I put a specific face on the people you just accused? Will you be guilted into changing your mind?" To which the answer is, NO.

As a matter of fact, I have long believed that the world would be a much better place if blatant stupidity was an imprisonable offense. But fat chance of that ever happening I guess.


I suppose where we ultimately disagree is... you think the person is a victim, I don't.
Hello, what are they a victim of? They have not personally lost anything, right? They have just been carelessly negligent with their property since they know they aren't the ones who will get hurt.


And you'd be surprised at how many technologically illiterate people know very well how to copy files around. I'm not expecting them to use full-disk encryption (that would be pointless, as either the repairman needs to fix the OS, or else the solution is don't give our login password over), nor am I expecting industrial-grade file shredding.

Just delete your non-trivial files. You should probably do that anyway, apparently everyone down there is a thief so they may also be stealing your email/bank/social media/other credentials, which hopefully IS something you care about.