DRM for Public Domain works at B&N

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Madam Broshkina

I am getting kind of tired of all the DRM is evil talk on this site. I bet if you searched for the phrase "DRM killed my puppies" you would get at least one hit.

No, it didn't kill them, it just locked them away in a cupboard and you could pet them, but only every third thursday in the month when there was a full moon and the Lord of the manor deemed you worthy enough of petting and you only used three of the fingers on your left hand

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Because nothing about what B&N (or Amazon or Sony) is doing prevents anyone from getting non-DRM'ed versions.



Yeah, I don't really have a problem with Mickey Mouse staying out of the public domain. I'd prefer that exceptions had been made for certain characters rather than everything getting a 20-year copyright extension over the previous laws, but I'm not going to pull my hair out over it.



Are we talking about e-books or wolves?

There is no "cultural conscience," just your dislike for DRM. Since adding DRM to a single version has zero effect on other versions, I fail to see any problem at all here.

I was going to make a point by point, but I think this isn't actually about DRM but a cultural rift. Let me ask you, and I think it will be answer enough, are you American?

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Are you American?

That's irrelevant. Either you have a rational position that you can clearly articulate, or you don't.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

That's irrelevant. Either you have a rational position that you can clearly articulate, or you don't.

Actually my position was going to be one of cultural identity as it relates to capitalism and the extent to which said cultural identity warps our individual reactions to capitalistic acts.

Generally speaking, Americans are far more forgiving of companies and businesses. Europeans, with a more socialistic background, are less forgiving. Americans, generally speaking, and from my experience on this forum, see very little wrong in the extension of copyrights, the use of DRM or the often promoted idea of 'it's a business, its only function is to make money'. Again, Europeans seem to be less forgiving of this idea.

I asked the question about your nationality because I find that whether you're European or American has a lot to do with your position on capitalism and DRM.


EDIT: and if you can make a rational case for DRM of any kind, then I'm all ears, because you'll be the first in history to actually make that argument work

[Lemurion]

I dislike DRM - however, there is one case where I can see its use: libraries and subscription services where you know ahead of time you're getting time-limited access to a file.

For "purchases," all I think it does is add an extra layer of complexity and cost without providing a shred of protection against piracy, but rentals are a different case.

As to DRM'd versions of PD books I think that while it's stupid to get a DRM'd version of a PD text - people should be allowed to produce or purchase them so long as non-DRM'd versions are available. However I do feel that publishers have the right to make the wrong decision (add DRM) when they add value to an existing PD text.

Everyone has the basic right to do stupid things - and the rest of us have the basic right to laugh at them.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

if you can make a rational case for DRM of any kind, then I'm all ears, because you'll be the first in history to actually make that argument work

*cough* confirmation bias *cough*

• Buyers of content do not receive unlimited rights to reproduce and distribute content, unless the creator / publisher / rights holder consciously grants that option.
• DRM, while not 100% effective, works well enough in several instances to keep most users honest. This allows the content creators / publishers / rights holders to receive payment for their work.

Seems pretty simple to me.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Couldn't see this news posted anywhere, so I'll link it in here (please delete as appropriate).

From TheConsumerist.com



http://consumerist.com/5325921/bn-wr...opyrights-what

Hi Mojoe,
I'm not going to disagree with you because I think DRM is a bone head move by B&N. However the books given way for free do have footnotes and additional material that are not part of the original work. This is true for Dracula I didn't look at the other books.

=X=

[Kali Yuga]

Oh yeah, I forgot to reiterate none of their actions are removing any books from the public domain, and as such are completely acceptable.

It is 100% acceptable to use content that is in public domain for commercial purposes. You want to make a movie? Write an opera? Charge $15 admission for the movie you made, or $750 for admission to said opera? Totally legit. Yes, that absolutely includes modifying the content and adding DRM, if you so choose.

"Public domain" is a set of laws regulating content, and that's about it. Any sort of "cultural conscience" is of your own invention and, as such, is (to put it mildly) non-binding.

[Elfwreck]

I agree that B&N (or any other seller) has the right to sell PD works at full price, with all the standard restrictions they push on their other works. However, if their explanation is, "For copyright protection purposes, these files are encrypted and cannot be converted or printed," they may be required to indicate whose copyrighted material is involved.

Did B&N register a copyrighted version of their public domain works? Who holds the copyrights on those works--the company, or some third-party hired editor? Do they register just the notes-and-introductions, or the whole book?

One of the shifts I'd like to see in copyright applications, is a requirement to indicate *what* is copyrighted in a book (song/movie/play/whatever); a claim that saying "this work is copyrighted by ____ and any use of it without rightsholder's permission is subject to up to a $150,000 fine," is fraud (an attempt to convince people to pay them money for use that would otherwise be free), if the majority of the work can be quoted/copied/reworked at will.

I'd like publishers to be legally required to indicate what elements of a book are copyrighted.

DRM? Sure; they can do that. However, if they're offering re-TOC'd Gutenberg texts, they have no copyright protection. If their only stated purpose for DRM is copyright protection, I'm not sure how removing that DRM could be illegal... there are no "digital rights" being managed.

And if enough places are offering PD books with DRM, there might be an opening for legal distribution of DRM-removal tools, with a stated purpose of removing unnecessary software blocks from works where the seller has no rights to control their use.

[Argel]

Originally Posted by Madam Broshkina

I am getting kind of tired of all the DRM is evil talk on this site. I bet if you searched for the phrase "DRM killed my puppies" you would get at least one hit.

DRM doesn't kill puppies. It just means you can't breed from them.

[luqmaninbmore]

In all this hullagulla about DRM, has any body actually bothered to load up some of the Google Book pdbs into Calibre and actually check if they are DRM infected? I did and, lo and behold, either Calibre can break Ereader DRM (without even entering a credit card number) or there is no DRM on these books. They convert fine into other formats (with some exceptions I need to open a ticket for). And while I greatly dislike DRM, I find EReader to be the most palatable because I can access my books even if I switch devices after the servers are shut down. Of all the current major systems it comes closest to social drm.

[dementrio]

If I buy a public domain book, strip the drm and share or even sell it, am I breaking the law?

[Musicman]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

In all this hullagulla about DRM, has any body actually bothered to load up some of the Google Book pdbs into Calibre and actually check if they are DRM infected?

You mean to say we should check something out first before commenting on it?

What a novel idea

I also think Ereader DRM is best of the worst forms out there.

[dadioflex]

Edit.

[dadioflex]

Edit.