specific e-book reader function question

[markj]

Hi Peeples
my younger brother has been using Kindles and Kobos for a long time now and I would ask him this question but he's in the Arctic camping so definitely no wifi lol.
My brother has a library on his HDD with pdf mobi and epub files that he's bought over the years. I'd like to buy my own e-reader and transfer those files to my device to read them. Is this a normal function of an e-reader? Is there restrictions that you can only read from books you have purchased? Is it as easy as an ipad where you access file and upload to inbuilt library function? normally tech savvy but currently a e-reader virgin. Help would be appreciated

[Sirtel]

You can transfer your own files to practically every ereader out there. I have no knowledge about iPads, but it's as easy as connect your reader to your computer with a USB cable and drag/drop your files to the reader. Where exactly you drop the files depends on the reader (for example, on a Kindle you'll have to drop them to the folder named "documents"). Also the files must be in the right format for the device (Kindles don't read epubs, so the file must be mobi or azw3 - the latter is the better, more modern format). Mobi support on a Kobo is rather poor, so the file should be epub or kepub (kepub is Kobo's native format). For a Nook it's epub. Converting from one format to another is easy and free - you can use various online converters or download and install Calibre (https://calibre-ebook.com/).

[markj]

wow that was quick Sirtel thanks alot. Sooooo what you're saying is if I had a Kindle it wouldn't matter about file format because i can convert a mobi or epub to pdf or azw? If this is the case then the brand of e-reader isn't as vital as it was years go. Am I right or did I wander off in the wrong direction?

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by markj

wow that was quick Sirtel thanks alot. Sooooo what you're saying is if I had a Kindle it wouldn't matter about file format because i can convert a mobi or epub to pdf or azw? If this is the case then the brand of e-reader isn't as vital as it was years go. Am I right or did I wander off in the wrong direction?

Yes, you're right. I wouldn't recommend converting to PDF, though. PDF is not a suitable format for eink. You can read them, but the experience leaves a lot to be desired, as PDF have fixed-size pages and the text doesn't reflow (i.e. you can't increase the font size or change the font type with PDF files and any ereader screen under 10'' is just too small for an average PDF).

[meeera]

You may also like to be aware that if he has licensed these books for his own personal use (rather than them being public domain books from Gutenberg etc), him giving the books to you is likely a breach of his ToS/of copyright.

[BookCat]

Originally Posted by meeera

You may also like to be aware that if he has licensed these books for his own personal use (rather than them being public domain books from Gutenberg etc), him giving the books to you is likely a breach of his ToS/of copyright.

Although not strictly legit, would removing the DRM overcome this, technically?

[meeera]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Although not strictly legit, would removing the DRM overcome this, technically?

Huh? No.

Though leaving DRM on and using a device registered to the brother's account might.

[stumped]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Although not strictly legit, would removing the DRM overcome this, technically?

technically Yes, legally no. ( the previous post was not clear)
anything without DRM can be converted, copied, moved.... the DRM is there to prevent/discourage that

if you come from a family that is used to sharing paperbacks between family members , then sharing e books should not offend your ethics much, but lets not debate that here.

removing book DRM is technically doable and simple to do but detailed instructions have to be sought elsewhere

[meeera]

Originally Posted by stumped

technically Yes, legally no. ( the previous post was not clear)

Given that the "wouldn't removing DRM overcome this" was in direct response to my "[it] is likely a breach of his ToS/of copyright." I thought it was clear - because no, technically, removing DRM does not overcome the copyright problem. It either makes absolutely no difference to it, or it makes it a more egregious breach.

[stumped]

let's call "this" ambiguious:

"Although not strictly legit, would removing the DRM overcome this, technically?"

my reading was that because of the clause 1 acknowledgement, "this" in clause 2 refers to technicality, not legality.

you read it differently, and re-reading the prior context , I can see why

so a clarification seemed in order

[j.p.s]

I think that BookCat misunderstood post #5 rather meera didn't parse post #6 properly.

Post #5 was strictly about licensing, DRM removal does not affect licensing in any way.

[stumped]

so to sum up.
a standard ebook licence says this copy is allowed to be read on one device , registered to one account. Most vendors will generously issue multiple such licences for multiple devices all registered to the same account
DRM is used to enforce that.

deleting the licence page within the book, and/or removing the DRM does not change the licence conditions. [ and for the paranoid, amazon still knows who they licenced it to ...}

just like you cant un-copyright a paper book by tearing out the copyright page....

and "buying" something, does not give carte blanche, as one unfortunate school in the news recently found out. They purchased a standard retail Lion King DVD to show at some school fundraiser event. Someone shopped them to Disney who demanded , and got a large chunk of the funds raised.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/04/u...rnd/index.html

Emerson Elementary School received an email from a licensing company Thursday -- more than two months after the event -- saying they had to pay $250 for illegally screening the movie.
"One of the dads bought the movie at Best Buy," PTA president David Rose told CNN. "He owned it. We literally had no idea we were breaking any rules.

& no idea how much it costs to feed those cartoon lions

so don't read those e-books out loud to a crowd, folks... big brother may be listening.

[Quoth]

DRM is a separate unrelated thing to copyright. In some countries it's illegal to remove it even if the work is PD or CC. In other countries it's acceptable to remove DRM on copyright work as long as you don't make a copy available to anyone.

Copyright doesn't give a publisher or author the right to claim additional rights or a specifically limited licence if that is either incompatible with local law or copyright.
Nor is copyright defined the same everywhere.

Regular Pay TV or PPV contracts are for a domestic situation. A public showing in a school hall or a pub needs a more expensive contract, can be x10 more.

Stored Video content:
1) Retail Sale
OR
2) Rental. A copy for rental costs far more.

Stored Video content viewing:
Item 1 or 2 above is ONLY for private viewing. Categories needing a different licence and payment are:
a) Piped in a hotel
b) Public in any sort of venue.
c) Theater
d) Streaming
e) Broadcast.

You can't even re-broadcast a Free to Air Channel without permission.

See also
Performance of copyright music in Public.
Performance of a copyright Play in public.

Reading part of a book in public is likely "fair use" in most countries. Making an audio book, reading it in public in episodes each week, or broadcast would need a licence.

Probably my primary school teacher broke copyright by reading the entirety of her copy of Prince Caspian to us in episodes one summer term. It would probably be fair use if we'd each bought our own copy. But some countries have no official "fair use".

[BookCat]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Although not strictly legit, would removing the DRM overcome this, technically?

stumped's interpretation of my meaning in post 10 is correct.

I suppose I was thinking along the line of: his brother has bought and paid for the books, so although it's not legit within the terms of the copyright, I saw no harm in him borrowing his brother's books. But I suppose that's the thin end of the wedge, and I now realise that this is how full blown pirating begins.

Sorry. Didn't mean to start a war. But the old chestnut of "I can lend a friend a paperback, why not my ebook?" goes into all kinds of issues about whether giving (or loaning) should involve the loss of the copy to the original owner etc etc.

So the answer to the OP is: no, he can't put his brother's ebooks onto his own device. It's illegal, immoral and undoable.

[stumped]

Originally Posted by BookCat

stumped's interpretation of my meaning in post 10 is correct. ..

So this answer to the OP is: no, he can't put his brother's ebooks onto his own device. It's illegal, immoral and undoable.

2 out of 3, maybe. I thought we'd agreed that technically, it's very doable. Strip DRM, copy, install...
Lots of things to do with digital items are very doable, and undetectable.

And for what it's worth, I don't agree that making a copy of a bought book for a family member is some sort of gateway drug to full-on active piracy.
I would not dream of uploading any media that I had bought to some help yourselves public file share, but if my daughter wants to read something I bought, then I don't regard using a send to kindle as anything morally different to lending her a paper book. Or lendng her the actual kindle with the book on it. There is not yet a "for my eyes only" clause in the licence, so that last scenario is completely legal. Send to (her) kindle may not be, but the net effect is the same. She gets to read the book either way. If Amazon don't like it they can shut down send to kindle.