Adobe DE 4 spies on users

[mandy314]

@Froide
Thank you very much for the information.
Every item reasonable and necessary it seems, and Adobe only doing the DRM job and collecting data for the publishers. Nothing is stored, no user profiles are build I suppose.
It's like a 100 course meal. Every item may be tasty and nutritious - but in the end you will feel sick.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Can you explain in what way the time-limiting DRM provided by Adobe and used by libraries is a "scam", and in what way we are being "taken for a ride" by it?

I would be happy with my library knowing about my reading a lent book and a DRM service doing some magic in the background (time-limited DRM). But most of the data at the library and all the data at the DRM service should expire with my lease on the book - no data storage and for sure no data collection for third parties like publishers.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mandy314

I would be happy with my library knowing about my reading a lent book and a DRM service doing some magic in the background (time-limited DRM). But most of the data at the library and all the data at the DRM service should expire with my lease on the book - no data storage and for sure no data collection for third parties like publishers.

I agree, but that's not what I was commenting on. My comment referred to the claim that DRM itself was a "scam" and that we are "being taken for a ride". I really can't agree with this viewpoint.

[ShellShock]

I should have been clearer. The scam I was referring to is the logging, which I believe Adobe will use as scare tactics to justify the need for and the cost of their DRM to the publishers. I don't recall saying anything about library lending.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Judging from articles that appeared after Nate's in The Digital Reader, it sounds as though ADE's scanning of entire libraries hasn't been verified yet. What has been verified is the transmission of data from books opened with ADE (including non-DRM'd titles).

Aren't metatdata, page numbers and percentages logged by Amazon and Apple as well? If not, then how does your iPad or Kindle library get synchronized across devices and where does that information get saved?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ShellShock

I should have been clearer. The scam I was referring to is the logging, which I believe Adobe will use as scare tactics to justify the need for and the cost of their DRM to the publishers. I don't recall saying anything about library lending.

I must have misinterpreted your message in that case, for which I apologise. It sounded to me as if you were saying that DRM in and of itself is a "scam", which it is not: it's very necessary for such things as library lending.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

J
Aren't metatdata, page numbers and percentages logged by Amazon and Apple as well? If not, then how does your iPad or Kindle library get synchronized across devices and where does that information get saved?

Yes, they are. Amazon uses the ASIN identifier of the book to identify it.

[robko]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Aren't metatdata, page numbers and percentages logged by Amazon and Apple as well? If not, then how does your iPad or Kindle library get synchronized across devices and where does that information get saved?

Yes, but the difference is that Amazon/Apple would send you closed the book/synced etc at 9:03 am on page 342 so it would know what was the most recent and what page to open to. The Adobe info records that at 8:30 you turned to page 302, at 8:30:30 you turned to page 303, at 8:30:35 you went back to page 302, at 8:30:40 you turned to 303 etc. I'm willing to allow the 1st example if I want to sync between the devices, the 2nd one stinks of Big Brother. And that's totally aside from the fact that it's transmitted in the clear.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I must have misinterpreted your message in that case, for which I apologise. It sounded to me as if you were saying that DRM in and of itself is a "scam", which it is not: it's very necessary for such things as library lending.

If it's "very necessary for such things as library lending" why do libraries also offer DRM-free lending, in the form of mp3 audiobooks and more?

If you only mean that some publishers insist on it, that begs the question "why do they insist on it?" If they only insist on it because Adobe has "scammed" them into thinking it has value it does not, then that's a problem.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

If it's "very necessary for such things as library lending" why do libraries also offer DRM-free lending, in the form of mp3 audiobooks and more?

Those are on CD, right? Lending a physical product is very different to lending a digital one. DRM is useful for digital lending simply to ensure that the library only lends the item the number of times simultaneously that they've bought a licence for, and that the usage rights expire when they licence says they should. The DRM is a benefit from both the library AND the publisher's viewpoints.

[gweeks]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Those are on CD, right? Lending a physical product is very different to lending a digital one. DRM is useful for digital lending simply to ensure that the library only lends the item the number of times simultaneously that they've bought a licence for, and that the usage rights expire when they licence says they should. The DRM is a benefit from both the library AND the publisher's viewpoints.

No those are not on CD. A lot of the audio book checkouts in overdrive are no DRM MP3 files that you delete on your honor at the end of the checkout period.

Greg

[John F]

Originally Posted by gweeks

No those are not on CD. A lot of the audio book checkouts in overdrive are no DRM MP3 files that you delete on your honor at the end of the checkout period.

Greg

Not to mention Open EPub being available at libraries; O'Reilly ebooks, for example.

[crossi]

I want an ereader with no internet connection. Mine is never turned on so for me it is a useless and now intrusive expense.

[hardcastle]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Those are on CD, right? Lending a physical product is very different to lending a digital one. DRM is useful for digital lending simply to ensure that the library only lends the item the number of times simultaneously that they've bought a licence for, and that the usage rights expire when they licence says they should. The DRM is a benefit from both the library AND the publisher's viewpoints.

The library only cares about DRM because the publishers force them to. From the library's point of view, removing the DRM schemes would let books be read on any device, allow for greater library self-sufficiency (not dependent on any DRM services to function), lower tech support costs (because DRM is confusing and is prone to issues), and would likely mean a different pricing scheme from the publishers themselves.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by hardcastle

The library only cares about DRM because the publishers force them to. From the library's point of view, removing the DRM schemes would let books be read on any device, allow for greater library self-sufficiency (not dependent on any DRM services to function), lower tech support costs (because DRM is confusing and is prone to issues), and would likely mean a different pricing scheme from the publishers themselves.

Lending books without DRM is giving books away, not lending them. People can't be trusted to delete books at the end of a loan period. If I were a publisher, I certainly wouldn't lend out books without an expiry mechanism. It's a completely understandable requirement for a publisher to have, and Adobe are not the "bad guys" for providing a mechanism for fulfilling that requirement.

[DiapDealer]

I'm finding it harder and harder to swallow the "scanning the computer for ebooks outside of ADE's library" portion of the claim (not that I'm excusing the transmission of ANY--clear-text or encrypted--personal data). If not a service, then a separate thread/process would need to running while ADE was open to actively search for ebooks on the computer's hard-drive. Something like that should be trivial to detect.

I open epubs that "aren't in my ADE library" (and in fact only exist in my calibre library) with ADE all the time. It's called "Open-with." Neither the OS-level file association method, nor the plugin of the same name for calibre actually "adds" an ebook to ADE's library when employed. I find that to be a more likely explanation for calibre-only titles appearing in an ADE generated log-file, than a rogue process scanning your physical media for titles.

None of which addresses the issues of the transmission of the data that has many disturbed mind you, but I'm just going to need to see some more compelling evidence supporting the claim that details about books that were "never" opened by ADE are being actively sought out and collected.