My perspective on buying books with DRM

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by hannah

Sometimes I wonder if it would change much if they would leave drm altogether. Most people want to be honest and will pay for what they want. It wouldn't surprise me if in the end the drm schemes costs more than to trust the majority and accept some will not be honest.

The kind of thing that DRM is designed to prevent is the person who buys a book and then casually gives a copy of it to a few of their friends, because they see nothing wrong in doing so. It's not there to prevent serious piracy.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's the same for all digital goods. That's really the way it has to be - there's nothing physical to "own". Even when you buy a paper book, all that you own is the paper, glue, and ink; you don't own the contents of the book. You can't, for example, read it out loud in public.

Actually, it's perfectly legal, for example, for a librarian to read a book to group of children in a library. As long as you're not charging people to hear you read, then it's legal.

READING ALOUD

Reading aloud to your children or privately to someone else will never be illegal. What is illegal is reading someone else's work for profit without permission.

In other words, you can read A CAT IN THE HAT to your kids or a group of kids, but if you do that and charge admission without the permission of the Dr. Seuss' estate or publisher, it is illegal. It is also illegal to sell a copy of your reading if you do so without permission.

http://marilynnbyerly.com/areader%27sguideto.html

Shari

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by shalym

Actually, it's perfectly legal, for example, for a librarian to read a book to group of children in a library. As long as you're not charging people to hear you read, then it's legal.

http://marilynnbyerly.com/areader%27sguideto.html

Shari

It probably varies by country. In the UK, a so-called "public performance" of a copyrighted work requires the copyright holder's permission, regardless of whether people are being charged.

I don't know whether reading to a group of children in a library would constitute a public performance, but I have a suspicion that it probably would.

[Nick_1964]

Originally Posted by PandathePanda

I doubt there will be a drm that will be able to be used to trace where a share come from.

The new social DRM (also called watermarking) can, it includes a number that can be track back to the buyer.
In the Netherlands they use a couple of forms and mixes.
There are books with the watermark in the txt of the html, not visible during reading,if u use sigil you can see it.

The watermark is added to the cover in the picture.

The watermark is visible in the book itself by a copyright message and the last digits of the internal html files have the number, included into the toc.

Example, a new book I recently buyed has the txt: book is protected by a digital watermark: BUYLRAcWD18ZZV00ADJZaQs3XHBbBABNBxsHcwdtUScAIA8iA3 cDLFIk - 54fb16deeb6b0
The filenames have the corresponding numbers:54fb16deeb6b01.html 54fb16deeb6b02.html etc..

Then,there is invisible a thirth watermark:
<div id="x9789021457390.html4" title="Xl9G9a/OlIwf1VJ7z1Saou7BGYXM4k2CFF6g49ypsGJ73BOafvdKSg==" >

It has a data image: " L6a7VAAAAfklEQVQ4jZWRBBrAMAzD8v9Pd4fBKJFsWA9lzVJbc Wdmzjlr5/Er3pW7uf9STfrSju7JK4l/zXeFR6VV+KWQRNimtEmtc/acKaKdfzmZTxEhcNHnR5pl1dPdxUl+5VQkzY125bq+XUJSeB0t ja/5aCALIM2cgSj2YKlyf4t3PU+lMetugyOCAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC"

In the content.opf the same number returns:
<dc:rights xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Copie : 54fb16deeb6b0 -</dc:rights>

In the toc.ncx: <content src="Text/54fb16deeb6b06.html#toc_marker_9789021457390_-1"/>

Thats all in one book..it can be removed but then you have to rebuild it from scratch. (I have changed all watermarks for privacy reasons)
It doesn't track to me directly,but it tracks back to the seller,and the seller has to keep a record to which customer this book is sold.

The adobe DRM was okay, remove the drm by whatever program and there are no tracks left, this one is almost impossible to simple loan the epub to a friend,I didn't have seen a program or plugin that is able to remove it.
A hard copy of a book,you can share with everyone,if you share your reader with the epub on it,someone can take it out and distribute it,just copy the file is illegal and the copy has all the watermarking.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It probably varies by country. In the UK, a so-called "public performance" of a copyrighted work requires the copyright holder's permission, regardless of whether people are being charged.

I don't know whether reading to a group of children in a library would constitute a public performance, but I have a suspicion that it probably would.

So libraries in the UK don't do story time for children? That's just really sad. What about teachers reading to children in a public school? Is that also not allowed in the UK?

Shari

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by shalym

So libraries in the UK don't do story time for children? That's just really sad. What about teachers reading to children in a public school? Is that also not allowed in the UK?

Shari

I honestly don't know, I'm afraid. I would guess that schools are OK, because they aren't public spaces.

[barryem]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Interesting, thanks for posting it. I'm sure you could do something similar with text, maybe change a set pattern of words sprinkled through the book that wouldn't affect reading. Maybe it would even explain all the typos in corporation published ebooks

I would hope they wouldn't change anything in the text. If they did I'd feel cheated and I'm sure most authors would as well. I'd be surprised if they did that.

I'm not bothered by watermarking. I don't think it's at all accusatory. It's a recognition that some people are dishonest. I suspect that there actually are a few dishonest people in this world.

I think the most important reason for DRM from the publisher's point of view is probably to make them feel safe when selling digital books. Hopefully watermarking will do that and will be one of the factors that makes encryption fade into the sunset.

Barry

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by shalym

So libraries in the UK don't do story time for children? That's just really sad. What about teachers reading to children in a public school? Is that also not allowed in the UK?

Shari

Library pbooks are often (once upon a time, always) different editions from the comercial versions with thicker paper and higher quality bindings. And different licensing terms and above all, pricing. Presumably there is an implicit (or explicit) performance license in the contract. Ditto for textbooks.

In the US a library or school reading would fall under fair use because it is a common and expected use. Probably the same at a bookstore or book club meeting. Most likely not at a theater or nightclub.

Common law draws heavily on common sense but that is sorely lacking in publishing circles so... who knows?

[barryem]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The problem is, though, that with an ebook, you're not lending it to your friends; you're making an additional copy of it, and giving that copy to your friends.

I really think that's a red herring. Most people read most books once, digital or paper. Passing it on to someone else gets the book read about as many times whether they keep a copy for themselves or not. I suspect the effect of this on a book's sales is very small and because making it easy to share a book is likely to get the book talked about more that effect is as likely to be positive as negative.

Barry

[hannah]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The kind of thing that DRM is designed to prevent is the person who buys a book and then casually gives a copy of it to a few of their friends, because they see nothing wrong in doing so. It's not there to prevent serious piracy.

Well that's what I'm saying, doesn't drm cost more than this ?

I wonder if giving a copy to a friend is such a bad thing to publishers. It's not for nothing amazon and others give away freebies who are the first off series. It's a form of publicity. I often have bought the books after reading a PB someone lend to me if I liked it, or bought others from the same author.
I don't say everyone should start to give away copys, but that I wonder if there would really be a loss for authors and publishers compared to maintaining the whole drm thing.

Personally I don't believe drm helps to keep honest people honest. Education can help to raise honest people and and people can be made aware of what is right and what not, it's not drm that does that, it's a personal choice.

If ebooks are sold at an honest price, are easy to get and are easy to manage most people will do the right thing. Drm, regional restrictions, walled gardens and such don't contribute to that, they restrict choices in such a ridiculous way that they make people do things they normally wouldn't do such as lying about location or download pirated versions if getting them legally isn't possible, and circumvent drm to be able to read books.

To be clear, all my ebooks are bought legally and I don't give them to others, and I never downloaded a pirated book, but I know of others who did for that reason.

As far as I can see the only real benefits to drm are to manage the lending off books in libraries, and most of all to keep people in a walled garden and in that it's very effective.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Library pbooks are often (once upon a time, always) different editions from the comercial versions with thicker paper and higher quality bindings. And different licensing terms and above all, pricing. Presumably there is an implicit (or explicit) performance license in the contract. Ditto for textbooks.

In the US a library or school reading would fall under fair use because it is a common and expected use. Probably the same at a bookstore or book club meeting. Most likely not at a theater or nightclub.

Common law draws heavily on common sense but that is sorely lacking in publishing circles so... who knows?

Well, at a theater or nightclub, I would assume that people have paid a fee to be there, which would definitely make it a violation of copyright. At a library or a public school, there is no fee paid to attend the reading, so it would not be, under any circumstances. Also, when I talk about a teacher reading aloud to the students, I'm not necessarily talking about a textbook--I'm talking about reading a story. When my daughter was in 4th grade, her teacher would read a book to the students every day for the last 20 minutes of the day. The students got to vote on which books would be read. Since the school district knew that this was happening, and fully condoned it, I really doubt that it was a copyright violation.

Shari

[murg]

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

It don't disturb you.- >Good for you. But don't insult people who have a different opinion.

Seeing my name is my books do bother me. In quite the same way bad formatting or typo do. The first thing i did with the harry potter book was removing the watermark.

[gmw]

Anyone that locks their house when they're not home should understand why publishers use DRM. That doesn't mean you approve or agree with the particular forms of DRM used, only that the reasons for the "security" measure are the same. When you lock the door to your house you know that you won't stop professional thieves from getting in. So why do you bother?

One reason is because it does, usually, stop a casual passer by from slipping in and pilfering. I think most of us accept that. Another reason may be that your insurance coverage requires it. You may also have other individual reasons, maybe past experiences that make you more or less security conscious than other people. These reasons exist for businesses too, including the last, where a business's security awareness is often influenced by experience (that doesn't mean it is any more rational than the choices individual people make).

Does locking your door mean that you believe everyone that passes your door is a thief, that you are painting a bright red "untrustworthy" on every passer-by? No, of course not. That's just silly hyperbole. All you are doing is taking a reasonable precaution that acknowledges that casual/opportunistic thieves exist.

So it's easy to understand the "why" of DRM. All that's left to argue about is the how.

[Kasper Hviid]

I just bough a DRM epub. Okay, first I have to download and install Adobe Digital Edition ... then I found my adobe ID password, then figured it didn't work, then getting a new password, then having my computer being "authorized", finally downloading the file and then to the business of removing the DRM - what a bother!

I understand why people want to hinder piracy - it just seem a bit much sometimes. Files can be copied. If you can't deal with that, why not just stick to selling physical books?

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by gmw

Anyone that locks their house when they're not home should understand why publishers use DRM. That doesn't mean you approve or agree with the particular forms of DRM used, only that the reasons for the "security" measure are the same. When you lock the door to your house you know that you won't stop professional thieves from getting in. So why do you bother?

One reason is because it does, usually, stop a casual passer by from slipping in and pilfering. I think most of us accept that. Another reason may be that your insurance coverage requires it. You may also have other individual reasons, maybe past experiences that make you more or less security conscious than other people. These reasons exist for businesses too, including the last, where a business's security awareness is often influenced by experience (that doesn't mean it is any more rational than the choices individual people make).

Does locking your door mean that you believe everyone that passes your door is a thief, that you are painting a bright red "untrustworthy" on every passer-by? No, of course not. That's just silly hyperbole. All you are doing is taking a reasonable precaution that acknowledges that casual/opportunistic thieves exist.

So it's easy to understand the "why" of DRM. All that's left to argue about is the how.

I believe that a more accurate analogy is a landlord putting a lock on your rented apartment so they can control who you let in. I might understand their desire to control how many people you have in the apartment but I don't agree that they get to control it and redefine rental laws. I might understand their concern that if you let 2 of your friends stay with you that your 2 friends won't rent their own apartments and there is less rental income for landlords. Understanding doesn't make it ok.