Pan Macmillan: DRM Is Not Evil

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Abecedary

Apple isn't putting DRM on their music anymore. And the file format they've used all along (sans DRM) is AAC, which is an MPEG standard. Many devices other than iPods/iPhones support it (for instance, my Samsung phone I bought 4 years ago supports it). So, for the most part, the answer is yes.

That is why I wrote "Could". If they did not give the right to listen to the music on you phone they did not give perfectly reasonable rights. Of course you could rip the CD but could you do it legally?

[Icarusbop]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Since eRreader was designed for PDAs, this works fine. But no dedicated ebook readers use the eReader format, possibly because the unlock mechanism doesn't go well with the firmware. It's basically "enter password to open book," with your CC# as the password.

I don't think using a CC number as a key would achieve anything in the way of security, as it is very very easy to get a new CC card, with a new number and close the old account, thus enabling you to happily dish out the CC number to all and sundry with no worries about secuity.

I could be very frustrating for the legitimate user however, who cannot remember which CC was used as the key for the file they are trying to open.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

iTunes. Their DRM method is unobtrusive and works well. It doesn't inconvenience the user, and gives the user perfectly reasonable rights - eg they can turn their music to an audio CD.

I thought iTunes got rid of DRM? That's probably why it works so well.

[ahi]

Pan Macmillan: DRM Is Not Evil

Perhaps. But it is immoral.

I purchase products--I do not lease them. DRM is the seller's way of trying to defraud me by tricking me into what looks like a purchase but is actually a lease.

- Ahi

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Icarusbop

I don't think using a CC number as a key would achieve anything in the way of security, as it is very very easy to get a new CC card, with a new number and close the old account, thus enabling you to happily dish out the CC number to all and sundry with no worries about secuity.

I could be very frustrating for the legitimate user however, who cannot remember which CC was used as the key for the file they are trying to open.

All true. This is why the best security system is one that is permanently tied to you, and can't be easily used by anyone else... IOW, a biometric ID. The current problems with DRM are essentially a cry for biometric security to finally be applied to daily security practices.

Biometric security would allow minimal DRM to be applied to products, as it could prevent use by unauthorized users more reliably than any other method. Not that it would be perfect, just more reliable, and therefore minimize loss through sharing and theft.

(Ducks and covers as Big Brother Nay-sayers draw their swords and charge into the room)

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

All true. This is why the best security system is one that is permanently tied to you, and can't be easily used by anyone else... IOW, a biometric ID. The current problems with DRM are essentially a cry for biometric security to finally be applied to daily security practices.

Ah, but could you transfer the product to another person? One of the problems with DRM is that it interferes with loaning & resale rights.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Ah, but could you transfer the product to another person? One of the problems with DRM is that it interferes with loaning & resale rights.

I don't believe there's an inherent reason that they can't support transferring a license. Some actually do support lending files but not between us individuals. I think that's more a choice they made than something that is impossible to implement.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by ahi

Perhaps. But it is immoral.

I purchase products--I do not lease them. DRM is the seller's way of trying to defraud me by tricking me into what looks like a purchase but is actually a lease.

- Ahi

At least when I lease a physical item or property I know for how long it will be. When you lease DRMed content, it may be for a week, a year, a decade. Who knows?

[ahi]

Originally Posted by Alisa

At least when I lease a physical item or property I know for how long it will be. When you lease DRMed content, it may be for a week, a year, a decade. Who knows?

Very true.

Although for me the most significant aspect is the fraud.

If companies come out upfront and tell people: "We are not going to sell you this album, this game, this eBook. We're going to charge you and provide you access to it on our terms, terms which we are free to change at any time, even to the point of revoking your access."

Given such an honest approach, more people would simply refuse to buy than do today.

Lying with impunity and implying that they are indeed offering you a proper purchase is immoral and, in my opinion, should be illegal... like a number of other practices within the publishing industry.

- Ahi

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by ahi

Lying with impunity and implying that they are indeed offering you a proper purchase is immoral and, in my opinion, should be illegal...

It is "illegal" in the US (or at least, the fine print of contract terms that try to state it's a license, not a sale, are likely invalid). The courts have already basically said that they are sales, not licenses.

The publishers want you to think it's a sale when you're paying for the product, but then use DRM to treat it like a license. However, it's already been ruled in other business areas (with the exact same situation) that they can't do that. I'm sure the publishers know this, but most customers don't, so the publishers/retailers con customers into believing that we don't have certain rights. Then they try to use DRM to "enforce" it.

Sounds evil to me.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Hence it is as useless as pair of spectacles made from chocolate.

Chocolate is NOT evil!!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

AI wish some of the eInk readers would attach the software for unencrypted eReader .pdb files, though. I have plenty of those that I'd like to avoid re-converting to new formats.

The new Calibre 0.0.6 beta can convert your unencrypted PDB to something you can read.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Which other electronic media distribution industry can you name that has found a DRM method that satisfies both customer and producer?

The only comparable industry it seems to me is the music industry. Which after trying innumerable DRM schemes has finally decided that no DRM is best.

DVD DRM satisfies producers and customers. We can take a DVD with DRM and put it in any DVD player (as long as it matches the region) and it will play fine.

The problem with eBooks is the tower of eBable and that causes issues because of the DRM. Let's say there is an eBook you want at a price you are willing to pay. But it turns out the shop that has the eBook only has the ePub and the other shops charge more for the Mobipocket format you need. That does you no good unless you can strip the DRM and convert. But with a DVD, If I find a movie I want to buy, I can look around at any shop that sells this movie because I know if I buy it it will work with my DVD player. If we standardized on ONE eBook format (ePub and not PDF) then we'd be good to go., We could shop around and it would cost the publishers even less as they'd only have one format/DRM to deal with. And we (the consumers) would win as any copies we'd find would work so we can go price comparison very easily.

Another example is one of the recent Star Trek eBooks. BooksOnBoard & Fictionwise both only had it in eReader format. I managed to find it at CyberRead in Mobipocket. This was on the day of release. I think BOB may have it in ePub now. But even if a new format is forthcoming and the customer doesn't know this then the customer is going to shop elsewhere. So we need just ONE format and then DRm will work as well as it does for DVDs.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

All true. This is why the best security system is one that is permanently tied to you, and can't be easily used by anyone else... IOW, a biometric ID. The current problems with DRM are essentially a cry for biometric security to finally be applied to daily security practices.

Copyright does not say that the content is permanently tied to one person.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Copyright does not say that the content is permanently tied to one person.

There's no reason a biometric system would have to limit the number of licenses for the content to just one person. They could offer multiple licenses just like many software DRM schemes do.