
Digital Comic Publisher Quits, Customers Lose All Their "Purchased" Titles - Daiz
http://www.jmanga.com/urgent-message
======
Daiz
Yet another case that demonstrates that as long as DRM is involved (in this
case, being restricted to online reading of titles only), you're never
actually _buying_ anything, merely renting them indefinitely.
<http://xkcd.com/488/> keeps being sadly relevant.

It's also such a damn shame that genuine digital purchasing (as in, something
that involves DRM-free downloads) is such a rarity outside the music industry.
I just can't understand why every other industry (especially the video
industry) thinks that offering DRM-free downloads would somehow kill them or
whatever when digital music sales have only got better since the wide-scale
ditching of DRM, _especially_ since huge video files are much harder to share
casually than small music files. There is value in the catalog subscription
model that the likes of Netflix offers, but it should really have actual
buying options available next to it (ideally, a service could combine both
models - pay a lump sum for catalog streaming rights, then actually _buy_
individual titles, and as a bonus, not only do you get DRM-free downloads, but
you could also offer extras, formats that aren't possible with streaming,
unlimited streaming rights for actually purchased titles since they have the
available infrastructure for it, and so on).

~~~
InclinedPlane
I've been able to buy a lot of e-books without DRM (mostly tech books). But
still, it is rather ridiculous, I can't help but think that the people of,
say, 2050 will look back at the way we have gone about "managing" content in
this era and think we were all mad.

~~~
DanBC
Maybe. Or perhaps people just give up and the corps get their way and all
content is rented; and can only be accessed by devices with DNA biometrics.

There will be niche boutique artists creating dead tree books of obscure short
stories and bad poetry, for phenomenal pricing.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Based solely on what seems to be a technological advantage to those who desire
content to be un-DRMed, I'd say that scenario is very unlikely. At least not
without an extensive world-wide police state enforcing it.

~~~
DanBC
For many years when I bought a console game I was able to sell that game when
I'd finished with it. Japanese[1] companies were especially unhappy with the
second-hand market, and took vigorous efforts to stop it. US companies are
also keen to prevent this re-sale of games.

Now many games are unable to be sold on.

When I buy a DVD there is a clear benefit to me in being able to play that DVD
in my player, no matter where I buy it. Yet DVDs are region locked. VHS tapes
had Macrovision anti-copy signals; DVDs had region protections and CSS; BluRay
has region protections and several layers of DRM; restrictions continue to get
tighter, not more relaxed.

Laws are also getting stricter. The 1996 WIPO treaty
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_Treaty>) led to the
introduction of the DMCA and similar laws in other regions. (Circumventing
technical protections is illegal under the DMCA but it's also illegal
throughout Europe, with various difference in each country).

I agree with "unlikely", but I'm not so sure about very unlikely.

[1] Japanese companies have been doing this longest, since SNES times. I
think, but I could be wrong, that they managed to make second hand sales of
games illegal. Maybe they just wanted to do that?

------
koide
Companies should have the term "buying" forbidden if DRM is involved.

(This page [http://www.jmanga.com/hoshi-no-samidare-the-lucifer-and-
bisc...](http://www.jmanga.com/hoshi-no-samidare-the-lucifer-and-biscuit-
hammer/5) is filled with "buy" this and that)

~~~
Wingman4l7
There's actually a "We The People" petition on this: "Force companies to
change language from "buying" to "licensing" when dealing with DRM-restricted
goods." [https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/force-companies-
ch...](https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/force-companies-change-
language-buying-licensing-when-dealing-drm-restricted-goods/myq4rZjX)

Before you derisively dismiss this, you might want to take a look at their
response to the cellphone unlocking petition:
[https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-
cel...](https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-
legal/1g9KhZG7)

~~~
Gormo
A petition - especially to the executive branch rather than the legislative -
is hardly the way to approach this.

How about class-action lawsuits for fraudulent misrepresentations for
businesses that use the word "buy" in deliberately deceptive ways?

~~~
coldtea
> _How about class-action lawsuits for fraudulent misrepresentations for
> businesses that use the word "buy" in deliberately deceptive ways?_

And then one or two judges declare it "OK", and that's it.

~~~
Gormo
Why do you think that would happen? Given the complexes of incentives attached
to the judiciary and the legislature, respectively, it seems more likely that
new statutes rather than case law would attempt to legitimize this practice,
which probably already runs afoul of existing case law.

And if it was likely to happen, wouldn't it happen anyway, even if there were
new legislation involved?

------
JOnAgain
The punchline:

>> Is there a way to download the manga I have purchased? It is not possible
to download manga from My Page. All digital manga content will no longer be
viewable after May 30th 2013 at 11:59pm (US Pacific Time)

------
sinak
Just a quick plug for <http://fixthedmca.org>

If you care about issues relating to DRM, please spare a few minutes and take
action by tweeting at your Congressional representatives. Not only should
owner's rights be protected, but people should have the right to circumvent
DRM systems when there's no copyright infringement.

------
rcfox
For what it's worth, it looks like the preview books simply have every byte
XOR'd with 0x42, and you can see the image requests coming in on the Network
tab of the Chrome developer tools while you're in the Flash-based reader. (I
can't say for sure if the previously-for-sale books have the same scheme
though.)

I doubt that this will reach the eyes of most of the users being screwed by
the DRM though...

------
mikecane
It will probably be unpopular to say so: But learn how to strip DRM. If you
paid for it, you should _own_ it.

~~~
greenyoda
It wouldn't help in this situation, since you can't even download the stuff
you bought[1]. Your "purchase" only got you on-line viewing.

[1] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5377617>

~~~
gngeal
What about a caching proxy? You _can't_ view it on your screen unless the
browser downloads it anyway.

~~~
greenyoda
It could be something like a streaming Flash video, which the browser never
has a complete copy of.

~~~
WalterSear
Streamloaded flash video is stupid simple to grab.

On windows, navigate to:

Users\USER\AppData\Local\temp\acro_rd_dir

And create a >hard< symbolic link for the .tmp file you will find there,
renaming it to .flv . I am sure, on a mac, the location name is similar.

Close the browser window, the tmp file will be deleted and the flv will no
longer be locked for access, and is now yours.

[http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/16226/complete-guide-to-
symbo...](http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/16226/complete-guide-to-symbolic-
links-symlinks-on-windows-or-linux/)

------
ehmuidifici
So let's change the title: instead of "Digital Comic Publisher", put "Steam",
"Sony" or EA. DRM is the 21th century worst trap of all and we must stop it
from spreading.

------
unsignedint
Ah... JManga... I didn't think this place was the best example of electronic
publishing to begin with. Their page structure was very misleading, too. They
had some "informative" page, that is unavailable to "buy" and such.

The idea of the service it was actually interesting, and they perhaps had a
better chance if it was all-you-can-eat subscription model as opposed to
retailing.

A bit of shame especially after coming into the market with big fanfare of how
all Japanese publishers joined the force making this possible... (and, it is
plausible whole business model was dictated by influences of those
publishers.)

------
shmerl
Another reason to backup all your purchases from the "cloud" services,
scraping off any DRM from them first.

------
RexRollman
The problem is that there are no consumer protections built into DRM law.
People should never be locked out of their content.

In my opinon, JManga should be forced to continue to support their
authentication systems or be forced to permanently unlock the content.

~~~
jiggy2011
The problem is, how do you define DRM vs just a regular online service?

If I launch a web-app for example I don't necessarily want to have to support
it forever.

~~~
pifflesnort
This is, at its core, the problem with webapps.

~~~
coldtea
Really? How is it any different from:

a) regular proprietary apps.

b) regular open source apps that they don't have a community to continue them
after the original coders lose interest, and you don't know enough programming
to support them nor have the money to pay someone to work on them?

~~~
kevingadd
b) is like saying 'how is this any different from a car if you drive it until
it runs out of gas, and then push it into the ocean, and then wait until it
rusts from being under the water, and then you forget where it is?'

Yes, of course it is possible to deny yourself the ability to view content,
use software, or access goods that you have purchased. That is beside the
point, which is that webapps are inherently transient - unless you have access
to the ability to configure and run your own server to host the application,
the ability to use it can be revoked at any time, either through malice,
negligence, or the regular operation of business. There are numerous examples
of all three categories. This is, in fact, worse than proprietary software. At
least with proprietary software (DRM/authentication notwithstanding), you have
an executable, and it works on the machine you have right now. VM software
like VMWare allows you to preserve a particular software configuration
indefinitely if you wish, and access that software as long as you like.

------
johnrgrace
What has me puzzled is why they didn't try and sell their usebase, I'd be
willing to make a modest offer. But now that they've gone off really pissed
off their customers the value of that asset just dropped like a rock.

------
DanBC
How does the DMCA handle cases like this?

Are you allowed to rip the protection to keep access to something you've
"bought"? Or is that circumvention and thus a criminal offence?

~~~
dangrossman
It is circumvention and it is illegal. There are only 6 allowed exemptions to
the rule as of the last rulemaking, and making backup copies is not one of
them, no matter the situation. The only exemption that exists for DRM-
protected ebooks is to make stripping that DRM legal when no version of the
ebook compatible with screen readers or read-aloud functions exists, so that
the visually impaired can access the text.

~~~
kefka
So, why buy any media then? I'd rather just pirate it and be on my way.
Xkcd/488 makes a great point: buying and then freeing from a dying system is
just as illegal as copyright violation.

So, media types that use any DRM: why should I buy your product?

~~~
dangrossman
I doubt any media companies are much interested in swaying self-professed
pirates that demand rights not offered to their side. You're coming from this
imagined position that you deserve license to others' work on your terms at
your price. The companies offering media with DRM for sale on the market have
no such delusion that they have an innate right your money; they're OK with
you not taking their offer. That's fine, since the value proposition is
suitable to millions of others who will make the purchase on the terms offered
-- watching a movie today is still worth some number of dollars even if you
might not be able to dust it off 20 years from now to watch again. They're not
OK with you infringing their rights to their property instead of declining the
offer. But really, your moral and ethical compass won't be turned by logic or
debate.

~~~
kefka
In terms of a capitalist debate, one side charges money for substandard
product. The other side charges less, while providing a much better product.
It just turns out, with copyright applied, the better side is illegal.

But being illegal hasn't stopped pirates yet, has it?

One major side effect isn't them trying to sway us; instead they are forced to
release movies in the range of weeks, and not the traditional years. So yes,
pirates are a competitive pressure downward.

Don't get me wrong: I think people should be paid for creative works. I like
creative stuffs. I just disagree with putting locks on our culture, that are
physically or legally hard to remove.

------
cmorgan8506
Friend of mine runs something similar. <http://www.thefabler.com/>

~~~
kefka
If your friend uses strong DRM and/or uses cloud based "purchasing" to keep
users from possessing the bought files, I hope he fails.

The last thing I want is more DRM peddlers catering to people who aren't in
the know about every tech nuance out there. So yes, it can he unduly harsh.
But in our legal environment (with little recourse), drm providers almost
always deserve it.

An exception to that is companies that sell "drm" servers to authenticate that
only X licenses of software are used at one time. License compliance is
another drain on innovation, but can be effective in keeping legit in
compliance.

------
jiggy2011
The purchasers are issued a refund in the form of a gift card. So, if you
purchased it and DRM stripped it then you get to keep the comic and get the
refund!

Edit: Looks like you don't

The point I am more worried about here is that we are actually reliant to an
extent on piracy and DRM stripping in order to preserve abandoned works.

~~~
ChrisClark
The refund is only for the points you haven't spent yet. If you 'bought'
something you will not get the money back and you will never get to see it
again.

~~~
tomjen3
Fraud. Isn't that what chargebacks are for?

~~~
hga
Yeah, that's what I've been thinking. But they've been in business since
sometime in 2011, and chargebacks only seem like forever, aren't they limited
to 6 months or so?

