eBook Publishers Sickening Of DRM Too!

[Ed Hansberry]

Publishers of ebooks are beginning to tire if the problems consumers are having with current DRM technologies. I presume this is mainly because consumers either don't buy the ebook because of the DRM hassle or they cost the publisher/retailer money in support calls working through the DRM hassle.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2003/20030715-ebook.gif" /><br /><br />The Association of American Publishers Enabling Technologies Committee and the American Library Association Of Information Technology Policy issued a white paper in March of 2003 titled <b>What Consumers Want In Digital Rights Management (DRM): Making Content as Widely Available as Possible In Ways that Satisfy Consumer Preferences</b>, which you can download <a href="http://www.publishers.org/press/pdf/DRMWhitePaper.pdf">here (800K Adobe PDF file)</a> and read the full report yourself. Areas the paper focused on included, but were not limited to:<br /> <br />• Ability to move content from one device to another<br />• Ability to transfer ebooks, either lending or donating, to another party<br />• Format interoperability<br />• Consistency of ebook reader's basic features<br />• User friendly libraries for consumers to keep their content<br /><br />I love the first sentence of their recommendations. "The first generation of DRM products was designed to protect content. In many ways, it may do that too well." I'll say. Some implementations (*cough* DRM5 *cough*) protected content so well nobody could easily read the book. Let's hope something useful comes of this study.

[gorkon280]

I have bought one book. I cannot lend it out and everytime I upgrade I have to re-activate the device that has been upgraded! :evil: This is why I have not bought more.

[ctmagnus]

• Ability to move content from one device to another


*cough* RIAA, ARE YOU LISTENING?!?

(sorry if this is considered OT but I have the same issue with both media.)

[Jerry Raia]

I had an issue with a ebook i had purchased. After getting a new device and a new email address, I couldnt access the book any more. I paid for it now i cant read it??? Enough!

If I had bought a paperback I could have lent it to 10 friends, moved to a new house in another country and still been able to read the same book.

:frusty:

[DaleReeck]

Well, I'm not sure that lending it to friends is a legitimate complaint of DRM. They should buy their own if they want to read it ;)

But moving it to another platform or device you own is a legitimate complaint.

[KH]

I am probably as avid a fan of eBooks as you will find, and have been experimenting with formats since the day I first set up my Compaq '2010c PC Companion'. The article overlooked a few formats and readers that I encountered. Somewhere I have at least one 'book' that came on CD and could only be read on that CD. Fortunately most - but not all - of the books I previously purchased were released in other formats. I didn't really like having to re-purchase them however.

Microsoft's approach (which has been adopted for 'Secure Mobibook' and Adobe, I believe) of limiting the number of devices upon which a book may be loaded certainly is a basis for the concern that DRM 'Builds in Obsolescence'. This is my single biggest concern. By now I have a considerable investment of several hundred ebooks, and I just don't want buy something that might 'expire' if my finite number of devices die and I can't get permission for an upgrade.

This approach mirrors the handling of Operating systems and costly applications. To combat piracy it doesn't strike me as unreasonable for Microsoft to protect a license by tying it to a machine. Operating system releases have a limited life expectancy; the books I buy have a far longer one.

Libraries and the eBooks they lend are in a completely different position. Negotiating numbers of times that a book may be read, tying it to a specific device for each 'read', and setting up an expiration date do not seem unreasonable processes for borrowed books.

I occasionally use the Public Library if I can't find a book that I wish to purchase, or if I want to read a book but don't plan to reread it. But because I want the benefits of a physical personal library without the space and dusting requirements, I need to have a sense of permanence for my purchases.

I am, by the way, comfortable with the Peanut Press approach because there are so many available platforms, and I will surely be able to find SOMETHING upon which to load and read my library for a very long time. I just don't feel that way about any other current approach to eBook Security.

[Jerry Raia]

Well, I'm not sure that lending it to friends is a legitimate complaint of DRM. They should buy their own if they want to read it ;)

But moving it to another platform or device you own is a legitimate complaint.

My point was no publisher is trying to stop me from doing that.

[CoreyJF]

Maybe I am in the minority, but I enjoy reading ms reader books. I have purchased several and have download the free ms promotional books. Yes, I do wish the libraries were more extensive. I will even admit that I have download not so DMR protected books that I owned in paper format just so I could take them on the road without having to carry them around or because they were not available in .lit format.
I think peoples complaint that they cannot lend out digital books is ludicrous and a sign a ridiculous sense of entitlement that is all to pervasive in today's society. You cannot hold digital and physical property in the same light. If you lend your new potter to you neighbor it does not suddenly multiple into a million perfect copies.
As for different devices. I read .lit books on my ipaq, laptop, and desktop. They are all activated to the same account. If you are talking about a non compatible MS devices? Is anyone shocked when MS doesn't play well with others?

[Jerry Raia]

You have a good point about a million digital copies. That would not be right at all. There should be a way though to read what you bought and paid more for in this format and not lose it because you changed email addresses.

What about a keycode like we have for software.

[CoreyJF]

You have a good point about a million digital copies. That would not be right at all. There should be a way though to read what you bought and paid more for in this format and not lose it because you changed email addresses.

What about a keycode like we have for software.

That is why I set up a hotmail account specifically for my reader books.

[KH]

One thing to consider is the frequency at which you replace your PDAs. I have more than 8 in the last few years, between replacing damaged units and upgrading to new models. (I don't know how it is with MS Reader NOW, but it used to be that even a ROM upgrade cost you an activation). If I want an eBook to be read-able five or six years in the future at three in the morning when I REALLY need to re-read a particular passage, I just don't think I can go with a limited-activation model.

[Jerry Raia]

That is one of the issues I have with it. Because I have changed equipment and email addresses I can no longer access certian ebooks. This is a problem with the format that needs to be addressed

[dean_shan]

What about a keycode like we have for software.
Or you could just go with PalmReader. You just use your card to activate you books. Plus you can use it on Mac, Win, Palm, & Pocket PC. You can let friends read books because there in no device limit. Just a code to open the book for the first time.

[Jerry Raia]

I have heard alot about this as an alternative. It might be time to look into it.

[Jason Dunn]

Well, I'm not sure that lending it to friends is a legitimate complaint of DRM. They should buy their own if they want to read it ;)

No, he means with a paperback book you can lend it to a friend and then get it back, then lend it to another friend, etc. eBooks should be able to seamlessly transfer ownership - if my friend is reading my eBook, I can't read it until he gives the rights back to me.

DRM will continue to be a bitter failure until the rights belong to the PERSON instead of the DEVICE.

[Jerry Raia]

That is it exactly!! Excellent clarity on the issue!

[BarryB]

This approach mirrors the handling of Operating systems and costly applications. To combat piracy it doesn't strike me as unreasonable for Microsoft to protect a license by tying it to a machine. Operating system releases have a limited life expectancy; the books I buy have a far longer one.

[off-topic]
This is a minor point in the scope of the discussion and digresses somewhat, so feel free to not read. But I did want to point out that there is no reason for many people to expect that operating systems will expire.

Word processors, spreadsheets, email, and other standard workhorses of modern computer use long since reached maturity. That is to say, their basic functions haven't changed in several generations of the programs. There is little need for most people to change their workhorse programs and significant incentive for people to *not* change since they know how to use the programs.

The same incentive exists to not upgrade the operating system. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," is a motto that many adults I speak to seem to espouse. The idea of upgrading the operating system is not natural to them and causes many of them no little anxiety. They have something tha t works and can see no reason to upgrade.

Microsoft makes decisions to stop supporting their older operating systems. Logically, I do not disagree with the decisions, but emotionally, I feel for those who don't have $99 to upgrade *right now* and for those who are unwilling to learn the ins and outs of a new operating system. My mother-in-law, for example, thinks that accounts on XP have to do with her email account. She didn't have to deal with accounts under Win 98, but does on XP because I gave her a User account.

Anyhow, as I said, this digresses from the original topic.
[/off-topic]

[BarryB]

Maybe I am in the minority, but I enjoy reading ms reader books.

I enjoy reading them as well. Like you, I have quite a few promotional books. I don't think the post was regarding enjoyment of the MS Reader experience.


I think peoples complaint that they cannot lend out digital books is ludicrous and a sign a ridiculous sense of entitlement that is all to pervasive in today's society. You cannot hold digital and physical property in the same light. If you lend your new potter to you neighbor it does not suddenly multiple into a million perfect copies.


You are right in that you cannot hold digital and physical property in the same light. The ease of copying digital objects versus physical objects is clearly relevant here.

However, I highly disagree with your comment implying that it is ridiculous for people to expect to lend people digital books. This is something people want to do. It is not an unreasonable expectation at all.

Why would anyone want to read ebooks? Aside from portability (and you still have to have a device that about the size of, um, a stack of 3x5 index cards, to read them), I can think of no good reason to read ebooks. To say to potential readers "Yes, you can take it with you if you carry this device, but you have to register the book, you can't read it on your computer *and* your portable reader and you can't loan out the book to anyone else" is pretty certain to keep people from reading.

It is up to the IT community to produce a solution to the expectations of human beings, not to alter the expectations of human beigns to that of the IT community. To do otherwise is to degrade the wonderful promise that technology holds for humanity.

[gorkon280]

DRM will continue to be a bitter failure until the rights belong to the PERSON instead of the DEVICE.

Hmm...wonder if Microsoft could use the thumbprint reader as a way of securing the e-book (ie like the 5400 series and the 5500 series has). As far as adding it to a desktop, that would be easy. Then if you lend it out, you can set it up that someone else's thumbprint will be able to access the file for x amount of time and then the thumbprint gets deleted and only yours would open it. I think that sounds like an idea. I am all for authors making bucks on e-books, but if you continue to treat them differently than a paper book, they will be rejected. Make it possible for folks to lend them out and to transfer ownership, and you have a winner.

[rlobrecht]

wonder if Microsoft could use the thumbprint reader as a way of securing the e-book

Do you really want Microsoft to have a copy of your thumbprint?

[DaleReeck]

I'm not sure why people think it is legal (or fair) for one person to buy a book, then lend it to ten people for free. Eleven people just read the book, but the company and the author get only one sale? It doesn't matter if it's how you always did it with paper books. Under that logic, then downloading hundreds of songs you didn't pay for from web sites is perfectly legal too.

I have also lent out books. But I also recognize that it's not really legal and I am not going to demand the right to do it with electronic books. CoreyJF is right, the entitlement people are getting used to is getting ridiculous. While the record industry and alike are getting ridiculous in their Nazi-like tactics, their basic point that copyright is being ignored is still correct. In a few years, copyrights will be meaningless.

We should be able to manipulate what we buy in any way we want as long as it is for our use. But I am perfectly OK when copyright holders try to make it harder to share stuff illegally. The trick is, how to make the two coexist.

[Ed Hansberry]

I'm not sure why people think it is legal (or fair) for one person to buy a book, then lend it to ten people for free. Eleven people just read the book, but the company and the author get only one sale? It doesn't matter if it's how you always did it with paper books. Under that logic, then downloading hundreds of songs you didn't pay for from web sites is perfectly legal too.
Not sure I've seen anyone argue for that point, but with a paper book, you can loan it out or give it away when done. There are some books both me and my wife read. DRM5 makes it almost impossible to share and there is no way we'll buy 2 copies.

[PPCRules]

... Under that logic, then downloading hundreds of songs you didn't pay for from web sites is perfectly legal too.
...
Exactly! If, just like a print book, there was a way to have only one person access it at a time, that would/should be very legal. It's simply transfering ownership to another person, until that person transfers ownership back or to yet another person. What other product do you buy where you cannot transfer ownership if you are no longer using it?

What's happening here is books are being transitioned from something that is owned to something that is licensed for use, like computer software has been. With licensing, the publisher can demand any terms they want. But I feel that in that transition the value to the purchaser is lowered greatly. So until prices for single user licensing are greatly reduced from the price for ownership (buying a print book), people aren't going to embrace this transition and the market for ebooks will continue to flounder. It's not the concept, or even the delivery, that's holding things back. It's the pricing versus the perceived lesser value of the electronic copy.

[RedRamage]

I refuse to ever buy a high DRM book. :evil: The restrictions just aren't worth it.

I've been happily supporting Baen books for a number of years now. They really seem to get the concept of ebook. I suppose it helps that they are a SciFi publisher and so may be a bit predisposed towards accepting technology, but for whatever reason they really do understand the benefits of ebooks.

They sell 'em for very reasonable prices. They offer them in a large quantity of formats. They don't put any restrictions on how you can use the books your bought. They don't treat their customers like potential criminals. They offer free copies of a lot of books...especially the first book(s) of a series to get you hooked. :wink:

And, the most startling thing of all: They are making money doing it.

[PPCRules]

... or they cost the publisher/retailer money in support calls working through the DRM hassle.

This is probably very key in getting the problems fixed.

I have only dabbled in protected ebooks and the DRM tangles, but I've seen plenty of the problems. I've been too quick to just mutter and write it off as just an immature product (easiest to do with free promo editions). This is not helping the situation at all. I should have been on the phone to the publishers/retailers, so they know that things aren't working, and they realize the true cost involved in 'protecting their assets'.

[CoreyJF]

Digital and pysical are diffrent. Whether one person can read it or not. I lend out a copy of one of my books it is worn, it has my dog ears and notes. Pysical books wear the more they are handled, especially paperbacks which are the ones most often lent.

[davidspalding]

The argument of the portability (loanability, give-it-away-ability) of paper books versus the restricted use of a secure eBook ... misses the point. OF COURSE secure eBooks have limited portability, they're sold to the user who bought them, and allowing them to be copied -- digitally -- unlimited times can reduce the revenue of the publisher and discourage publishers from releasing eBooks. OF COURSE a secure eBook is licensed for limited use, just as other forms of media are (read the fine print).

I have long made the argument ... okay, for several months since I started reading eBooks ... that eBooks do not have the same "value" for me than paper books. NOT because of the production costs (which generally may be the same for bestsellers, though not for small publishers or self-publishers), but because I can't use it the same way. And publishers should realize that consumers vote with their wallets; all the PR spin in the world won't change that.

Publishers and advocates for publishers don't seem to "get it": if I can't use the eBook the same ways I use a paper book, I don't want to pay the same price. $20 for an eBook when the hardcover is $18? Maddening. $18 for the eBook when the trade softcover is out for $9.95? Sickening. $10 for an eBook that I can only read on two devices, and will "expire" in 180 days? Forget it.

I've suggested elsewhere that if I buy the paper book, I can get the eBook for free, or a few $. I've argued for reduced pricing for eBooks. Why? Because it's only an eBook. For the same reason that I won't pay $14 to download MP3s of an album when $14 will also buy me a CD, case, and liner notes. ... Some people just don't get it.

[Jerry Raia]

I thought that "Copyright" laws covered who has the right to make "Copies". If I lend out a paperback I am not making a "Copy" of it. If I move an ebook to another device and do not keep a copy of it I have moved it.

Am I wrong on this?

[davidspalding]

Moving is essentially the same as copying, in the digital realm, except that the old copy is deleted. Not so with dead tree products.

Also. There's a difference in effort in making 1 copy or 1000 copies of that paperback. There's very little difference in effort in making 1 copy or 1000 copies of unprotected digital files (eBooks). Hence, publishers' embrace of DRM, which prevents someone easily making 1 copy of a copyrighted book available via anonymouse FTP or HTTP, which can be accessed 1000s of times, and each copy spawned into 1000000s more copies ... ad infinitum.