protecting epub files from copying & printing

[darryl]

The only DRM which cannot presently be removed is Adobe's "hardened" DRM scheme. If Adobe had their way this would have been compulsorily implemented back in 2014, breaking compatibility with many devices. They were forced to back down and the result is that this system has never been widely implemented. Of course it can be by just changing a simple setting in the content server, which so far has not happened. When it does I expect that it won't be long before it too is understood and can be removed, though there are of course no guarantees.

In the meantime, Adobe continues to rake in the money from DRM which is easily circumvented by anyone who wants to take the trouble to do so. Does it serve any purpose? I imagine there must be some who try to do something forbidden by DRM, find they can't and leave it at that. Though there are also many who google and find their way to Apprentice Alf, or even, regrettably, Epubor. I have said in the past and still maintain that the best defence against piracy is reasonable prices and convenience. The miracle is that there is a thriving market for ebooks (and movies and music) despite the ineffectiveness of DRM.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by kso

It can't prevent people with enough motivation and|or money, but a simple way to do that is to publish in print only, on quality paper, very good typesetting etc.

Which absolutely did not work for JK Rowling, at all. Copies of her books hit the servers less than 24 hours after they were released in stores in paper.

In other words: DRM is as easily removed as suits are convinced it's a solution to their perceived problem.

"Suits." I think you grossly misunderstand who wants DRM; talk to a few hundred authors, first. Out of every hundred, over 95, and even as high as 99, want DRM for their work. In the publishing/media world, most of the creatives want it, too, as they are disinterested in giving their work away for nothing.

<snippage>[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by darryl

The only DRM which cannot presently be removed is Adobe's "hardened" DRM scheme. If Adobe had their way this would have been compulsorily implemented back in 2014, breaking compatibility with many devices. They were forced to back down and the result is that this system has never been widely implemented. Of course it can be by just changing a simple setting in the content server, which so far has not happened. When it does I expect that it won't be long before it too is understood and can be removed, though there are of course no guarantees.

In the meantime, Adobe continues to rake in the money from DRM which is easily circumvented by anyone who wants to take the trouble to do so. Does it serve any purpose? I imagine there must be some who try to do something forbidden by DRM, find they can't and leave it at that. Though there are also many who google and find their way to Apprentice Alf, or even, regrettably, Epubor. I have said in the past and still maintain that the best defence against piracy is reasonable prices and convenience. The miracle is that there is a thriving market for ebooks (and movies and music) despite the ineffectiveness of DRM.

As I've said a few thousand times before, here on MR, DRM is clearly not intended to preclude DRM-cracking by the type of folks that come to MR. Never was. It's intended to be a simple barrier to entry for the far less exploratory; it exists to prevent "casual theft," the bane of digital products everywhere, from good old Lotus 1-2-3 back in the day 'til now. We all know that; where Joe has some product, and loves it, takes it home, copies it to Susie Homemaker's computer, and to his daughter Jane's and his son Elroy's, etc. The sort of enthusiastic copying that nearly did 1-2-3 in, which was the real genesis of content licensing and people thinking about schema to prevent just that.

Hitch

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by Hitch

"Suits." I think you grossly misunderstand who wants DRM; talk to a few hundred authors, first. Out of every hundred, over 95, and even as high as 99, want DRM for their work. In the publishing/media world, most of the creatives want it, too, as they are disinterested in giving their work away for nothing.

<snippage>

Perhaps, but most have to take what they are given and the contract they sign may not even mention DRM.

I am unaware of any authors who refused a Baen publication contract or sued TOR when they removed all DRM.

Do you have sample statistics on what proportion of KDP authors ticked the "no DRM" box?

Or perhaps we should start with how many know it is there?

[darryl]

@Hitch. Very interesting post. I wasn't aware that such a high percentage of authors want DRM. I presume that statistic comes from your own experience in business? I don't disagree with your comments about casual copying and the purpose of DRM. Though the problem, of course, is that removing DRM is not limited only to the technically sophisticated or to the sort of people who visit this site. It is truly just a quick search away, and so-called "digital natives" are pretty good at searching for just about anything they want. To take your example, let's say that someone tries to copy an Adobe epub protected book onto the computer of one of their friends or family members, only to find to their astonishment that the copy won't work. How many truly just give up, or even think about it and decide they shouldn't be doing it? Yes, there are certainly some. But are there enough to justify the cost to themselves and the detriments to their customers? It is in some ways like putting a low fence around a property. It makes people aware by its mere existence that they should not be entering the property without authorisation, but denies the possibility of physical unauthorised entry only to those few physically incapable of climbing it. I don't know if we really have the information or statistics to come to a definitive answer.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Perhaps, but most have to take what they are given and the contract they sign may not even mention DRM.

I am unaware of any authors who refused a Baen publication contract or sued TOR when they removed all DRM.

Why would you be? Are you an agent? In the publishing biz with Baen or TOR? In a position to be privvy to that information? Where did you get your statistics?

Do you have sample statistics on what proportion of KDP authors ticked the "no DRM" box?

Or perhaps we should start with how many know it is there?

No, I don't have access to some imaginary statistic--but I have over 3,000 clients, on over 3700 eBooks, in the last decade, all of whom I've dealt with, personally. I have an intimate knowledge of how many not only want DRM, but would go to rather extensive lengths about it. "Most," most certainly do not have to take what they are given; you're talking about trade-pubbed authors, who are now in the significant minority. By millions, I'd point out.

Of all of those, plus a few thousand with whom I corresponded, or spoke, for whom we didn't do books, would you like to take a WILD guess as to how many I recall, that expressly did NOT want DRM? Wanna?

FEWER THAN TEN. I can recall every conversation I had, with an author, who said that they neither wanted nor intended to use DRM. Every. single. discussion. That's how rare that is. I couldn't BEGIN to remember every single one that told me quite vehemently that they DID want it.

I've done uploading for some untold number. We give them a questionnaire, to complete, which includes the DRM question, Y/N. Know how many opted for the N? None. Not one.

What about how many decided not to publish on SW (Smashwords) when they learned that they don't have DRM?

Pretty much ALL of them.

My clientele ranges from multi-million selling clients to the most unknown, and everybody in-between. Clients that had some of the biggest publishing contracts, in history, and some that never will. I'd say that's a fairly representative sampling, wouldn't you???

Now, you can talk all you want about Baen, Tor, etc. You can hate DRM if you wish. You can argue that because those two exist, that somehow, all authors everywhere have given up on DRM, or that they don't even know where to click to enable it, (you seem not to hold their intellectual capacity in very high regard...) but in addition to all this--which I know firsthand, not through Internet Yammer and hearsay--I answer several emails, every single week, from author clients and others, asking me how to put DRM on their OWN files, before they send them to friends, neighbors, reviewers, etc.

Originally Posted by darryl

@Hitch. Very interesting post. I wasn't aware that such a high percentage of authors want DRM. I presume that statistic comes from your own experience in business?

Yes, see above, Darryl.

I don't disagree with your comments about casual copying and the purpose of DRM. Though the problem, of course, is that removing DRM is not limited only to the technically sophisticated or to the sort of people who visit this site. It is truly just a quick search away, and so-called "digital natives" are pretty good at searching for just about anything they want.

I'm not saying that it is remotely hard. Amazon has just, of course, made it quite a bit harder, but, sure. But I think that I can also say that of the thousands of authors that I've dealt with and hundreds of publishers, you guys think that MRers, and other somewhat tecchie folks are "normal." I think you're wrong.

I would have thought like you, prior to starting my biz, and since so doing (a decade now), I've been shocked to realize that the average person is not remotely tech savvy. Of 100+ Word files that I see, in, say, a month, NOT ONE will have used styles or headings, or any of the more-advanced functions in Word. Not ONE. Most of my clients don't know what "downloading" actually means, or how to do it--they think it's clicking a Word file or jpeg, in an email. Most don't know where their "downloads" folder is, and on and on and on. Our publisher clients--businesses, some of whom you've heard of--don't, either.

You guys assume and project. You assume and project that the "average person" will do this or that. That they know what you do, or half of what you do, etc. I'm here to tell you that the "average person" doesn't. Most Amazon users don't know how to SIDELOAD their eBooks. (Think I'm lying? Ask bloody Amazon if I am.) You think those folks will even GOOGLE removing DRM, to "format shift?" I think not. Most couldn't care LESS about format shifting.

Again, in my clientele--lawyers, doctors, philosophers, publishers, Ph.D.s (recent, too), and so on. Yet, I can say with authority that if they ran into the wee brick wall you mention below, Darryl, they'd simply stop. How do I know that? Because I see, repeatedly, what they do, trying to follow our fairly simple instructions just to download and open their ebooks. You think folks that struggle with that, are going to go looking for Apprentice Alf? And follow his not-exactly-step-by-step instructions? Lotsaluck with that.

To take your example, let's say that someone tries to copy an Adobe epub protected book onto the computer of one of their friends or family members, only to find to their astonishment that the copy won't work. How many truly just give up, or even think about it and decide they shouldn't be doing it? Yes, there are certainly some. But are there enough to justify the cost to themselves and the detriments to their customers? It is in some ways like putting a low fence around a property. It makes people aware by its mere existence that they should not be entering the property without authorisation, but denies the possibility of physical unauthorised entry only to those few physically incapable of climbing it. I don't know if we really have the information or statistics to come to a definitive answer.

See what I've said, above. I neither recommend or recommend against DRM. I do what my clients say. It's not my job to discuss DRM with them, above "yes/no." I have precisely zero interest in participating in this conversation for the nine-millionth-time, because nobody ever changes their mind, and just because a mere handful of "cool kid" authors decided that THEIR wallets can withstand the pilfering, does NOT mean that the vast bulk of content creators, in all fields, think that DRM is a waste of time, or that they want to, from their perspective, enable thievery. I'm most certainly NOT going to lecture some author to not use DRM.

It's THEIR work, their book--it's not mine. And it's not anyone else's, inconvenient or not. I have NO right to tell them what to do, or counsel them to go one way or the other. And neither does anyone else. I would consider it shockingly presumptuous for me to think that it's appropriate for me to tell an author that they should or must do this or that, with their own property.

'nuff said.

Hitch

[darryl]

@Hitch. You've just about convinced me that DRM may indeed effectively serve the purpose you set out. I wouldn't quite say I've changed my mind, but I'm thinking about it. Because I was in legal practice for many years, and your comments do resonate with my experience to some extent. Many people, even some very intelligent people, simply don't understand the basics of how our society and its institutions function, except on the most basic level. Many years ago a friend of mine said of a colleague with multiple degrees including a masters, "I'm just surprised that he can get up and dress himself of a morning and get to work!" A surprising amount of time was spent just helping people with some pretty mundane everyday tasks. And yes, of course we do tend to erroneously judge people in general by reference to our own social groups. Of course, if you are right, my oft stated conclusion that most people choose to pay rather than go to the trouble of pirating if books are reasonably priced and conveniently available may need revision. I'm sure there are many people who fall into that group, but its certainly possible that the larger group is the people who are simply defeated by DRM, as easily circumvented as it is. At present I simply don't know.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by darryl

@Hitch. You've just about convinced me that DRM may indeed effectively serve the purpose you set out. I wouldn't quite say I've changed my mind, but I'm thinking about it. Because I was in legal practice for many years, and your comments do resonate with my experience to some extent. Many people, even some very intelligent people, simply don't understand the basics of how our society and its institutions function, except on the most basic level. Many years ago a friend of mine said of a colleague with multiple degrees including a masters, "I'm just surprised that he can get up and dress himself of a morning and get to work!" A surprising amount of time was spent just helping people with some pretty mundane everyday tasks. And yes, of course we do tend to erroneously judge people in general by reference to our own social groups. Of course, if you are right, my oft stated conclusion that most people choose to pay rather than go to the trouble of pirating if books are reasonably priced and conveniently available may need revision. I'm sure there are many people who fall into that group, but its certainly possible that the larger group is the people who are simply defeated by DRM, as easily circumvented as it is. At present I simply don't know.

Darryl:

I won't argue--I was simply gobsmacked, when I first got into this biz, by the vast, vast amount of "non-tecchiness" amongst the general public. Because people "like us" (whatever that is) spend a good amount of time on the Net, we do start to think that everybody is like us; that what we know how to do, in the more-general arena of computing--doing simple things like knowing what a file browser is, what Google is and isn't, knowing how to move files around, etc.--is known by everyone. I'm here to tell you that it's simply shocking in how much they don't know.

I literally deal with clients daily that don't know how to see the SIZE OF A FILE. I mean...I spend an obscene amount of time, writing and rewriting our various instruction sets--and don't think that what I'm about to say is hyperbole--I'm moved to instructions that are ALL PICTURES. I've made COMIC BOOKS.

My clients--all 3,000+, plus the other 2K or so that I've spoken to, etc., over the years--couldn't find a TOR browser if it was served on a Liverwurst and Onion sammich, kids. They won't pirate simply because they don't know HOW. The "Dark Net" gives them the willies, because they envision it a bit like the Bar on Tatooine, but darker and more evil, full of porny pitfalls for the unwary. And install a browser? What's a browser?


There was this character on a TV show that I used to watch, an older guy, (older than I am, but not by much, mind you), who used "the" with everything, to demonstrate his tech-illiteracy. "The" Google. "The" Facebook. "The" Twitter, etc, right? Ha-ha-ha-ha, so funny, right? Yeah, except I hear that every day of my life.

I'm perfectly willing to be convinced that "authors don't want DRM," but someone is going to have to come up with a shedload of proof, to do so, (not merely idle speculation, or an assertion created to support their own preference in belief) because what I've seen is overwhelmingly the opposite of that statement.

And in a million years, before I got into this line of work, I'd NEVER have believed that people could live in a world, where the technological marvels that we have available, are available, and not avail themselves of it, but...they do. FWIW, that seems to have nothing to do with class lines or race lines, either. Or even age, which I know is instantly where people's brains went (oh, those old farts, y'know...). I have MANY younger clients, well younger than I, who don't know a megabyte from a dog bite.

Hitch

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Which absolutely did not work for JK Rowling, at all. Copies of her books hit the servers less than 24 hours after they were released in stores in paper.

As an aside, I like the way JK Rowling implemented DRM on Harry Potter when she eventually released the ebooks. Watermarks instead of intrusive.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

As an aside, I like the way JK Rowling implemented DRM on Harry Potter when she eventually released the ebooks. Watermarks instead of intrusive.

Here's irony--I'd not read the books, when the movies came out, so I bought the books, via Amazon and whats-its, her website. I never noticed where or how the DRM was applied. Still don't know it, other than this post. And I know what DRM is, how it works, and how it's applied. But I simply never noticed, because I had no desire to move the books to an ePUB environment. {shrug}. Some I do, some I don't.

;-)

Hitch

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Here's irony--I'd not read the books, when the movies came out, so I bought the books, via Amazon and whats-its, her website. I never noticed where or how the DRM was applied. Still don't know it, other than this post. And I know what DRM is, how it works, and how it's applied. But I simply never noticed, because I had no desire to move the books to an ePUB environment. {shrug}. Some I do, some I don't.

;-)

Hitch

I read via Marvin on iOS (no DRM support at all) so for me, not having to jump through hoops was very much appreciated. Particularly so as I didn't have an activated ADE setup at the time so I've stopped buying ADE encrypted books.

There's an (invisible) hash embedded throughout the books identifying the purchaser (in case it gets uploaded to torrents, etc). However, the books don't require download and activation of special software or anything to copy and read on any epub reader.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

I read via Marvin on iOS (no DRM support at all) so for me, not having to jump through hoops was very much appreciated. Particularly so as I didn't have an activated ADE setup at the time so I've stopped buying ADE encrypted books.

There's an (invisible) hash embedded throughout the books identifying the purchaser (in case it gets uploaded to torrents, etc). However, the books don't require download and activation of special software or anything to copy and read on any epub reader.

I'm sure you're right on that. I just never noticed, LOL! I guess, though, in looking at the technical side, that enormous fortune could afford the additional costs of individualized watermarking. I can't imagine anyone else's books, ever, really, being that popular or having that much profit in them. (To pay for that type of watermarking cost.)

Hitch

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by Hitch

I'm sure you're right on that. I just never noticed, LOL! I guess, though, in looking at the technical side, that enormous fortune could afford the additional costs of individualized watermarking. I can't imagine anyone else's books, ever, really, being that popular or having that much profit in them. (To pay for that type of watermarking cost.)

Hitch

I expect it's super easy and cheap to do (probably just like adding serial numbers and something even Calibre can do easily). The watermark/hash isn't literally invisible. If you extract the epub (simple zip file) and view the underlying HTML with a simple text editor, you'll see the watermark/hash. It's just not visible when reading the ebooks via epub reader.

I believe comiXology does something similar for their DRM-free comics backups (granted, embedded in image files).

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

I expect it's super easy and cheap to do (probably just like adding serial numbers and something even Calibre can do easily). The watermark/hash isn't literally invisible. If you extract the epub (simple zip file) and view the underlying HTML with a simple text editor, you'll see the watermark/hash. It's just not visible when reading the ebooks via epub reader.

I believe comiXology does something similar for their DRM-free comics backups (granted, embedded in image files).

It's not really cheap because the watermarking has to be individualized and recorded. That means that largely, it's done by humans. That's not remotely cheap, compared to regular DRM schema. That's what I was saying. Adding a simple bit of text/mark isn't expensive, per se. The expensive part is the individualization and recordation.


Hitch


Hitch

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by Hitch

It's not really cheap because the watermarking has to be individualized and recorded. That means that largely, it's done by humans. That's not remotely cheap, compared to regular DRM schema. That's what I was saying. Adding a simple bit of text/mark isn't expensive, per se. The expensive part is the individualization and recordation.

Hitch

Individualization can be done automatically by software (likely by some mix of email address, purchase timestamp and book info which is then hashed). Then just keep a copy in a database presumably connected to customer purchase information/record.

Creating watermarked ebooks and storing that info isn't the problem. It's the enforcement and active monitoring of piracy sites, torrents, etc. that's expensive. Plus, it doesn't prevent casual piracy. Because of this, it's not worth it for most individual authors to implement.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Individualization can be done automatically by software (likely by some mix of email address, purchase timestamp and book info which is then hashed). Then just keep a copy in a database presumably connected to customer purchase information/record.

Creating watermarked ebooks and storing that info isn't the problem. It's the enforcement and active monitoring of piracy sites, torrents, etc. that's expensive. Plus, it doesn't prevent casual piracy. Because of this, it's not worth it for most individual authors to implement.

I'll take your word for it. I looked into watermarking about...5 years ago, trying to find an alternate solution, something middle of the road, and at that time, there was no automated WM solution available.

I just looked again, just now, and at least, on the first page of Google results, NONE of the solutions are automated; most can do a single "document" at a time, and one of them requires that DRM is ALSO provided, on the file, first. The two "batch" solutions I saw batch files, yes--but it's the same watermark on every file.

I did not see ONE single piece of software that would work with eBooks, or automatedly other than batching the same WM over and over. I saw ONE product, contentraven, which has dynamic watermarks in a closed environment, on "normal" documents.

So...it may not be quite as simple as you make it sound. If you know of existing, deployable solutions, I'd really love to hear of them.

Hitch