
As An Author, Why I Truly Hate Ebook DRM - danyork
http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2012/05/as-an-author-why-i-truly-hate-ebook-drm.html
======
jgrahamc
I, also an author, 100% agree with this. Also, the royalties that authors
receive (roughly 10% of what the publisher receives after the retailer has
taken their large, say 50%, part of the cover price) is tiny.

When you consider the months of work to write a book and divide by the return
it's not hard to see why authors have a hard time getting upset about 'lost
royalties'.

~~~
kkowalczyk
It's hard to see why authors should act irrationally. If poor royalty, not
DRM, are the major reason for poor earnings, authors should complain about
royalties, not DRM.

It seems to me that today the best way to make money on technical books is to
put the whole book for free in html on the web (for marketing and SEO) and
sell digital version (PDF/ePub/kindle), where the author gets 70% (kindle) or
~95% (selling PDF/ePub via paypal).

If you don't believe in free html version as a marketing tool, don't do it -
just build a nice web page for the book with TOC, a free chapter etc.

The point is: I'm mystified that authors of technical books (especially those
in the programming field) still work with publishers given that self-
publishing is potentially so much more lucrative and an author can probably
market his own book better than Apress markets an average book they publish.

------
casca
While I don't like DRM and will always choose an alternative product that does
not have it, I don't buy these arguments.

So looking at his points:

"DRM Is Anti-Reader": There's no reason that DRM could allow the easy transfer
of a book from one person or platform to another. You could submit a transfer
request and the publisher could re-encode the book to the new owner or format.
Would you expect that as the purchaser of the book, you'd be allowed to
photocopy it and distribute the photocopy?

"DRM Locks Readers In To Platforms": This is not necessarily the case. The
publisher could easily offer the same book in multiple formats. Converting
from source is a trivial technical task.

"DRM Adds Unneeded Complexity": DRM does add complexity, but as most people
read via an application rather than a text file, this can be abstracted for
almost all readers. Again, this is a problem with the implementation.

"DRM Stifles Innovation": Authors not getting paid so that they can eat also
stifles innovation. There needs to be a balance here, it's not all about
making everyone's work free.

"DRM Halts The Spread Of Ideas": If someone can't afford the book, in many
countries they can go to a library. They don't need ownership to read the
ideas.

In summary, the issue with DRM for books is the implementation. Many of the
problems listed are real but could be almost completely negated by the
publishers doing things that cost them almost nothing, even following the
assumption that everyone wants to read their books for free.

To be clear, I'm not implying that I support DRM or that it really does
significantly reduce the availability of books that have not be paid for, just
that the arguments presented here are against the current implementation
rather than DRM itself.

~~~
jellicle
You're misunderstanding the purpose of DRM. Every DRM format is cracked within
hours of release. The purpose of DRM is not and never has been to stop
"pirates".

The purpose of DRM is to get you, the legitimate user, to pay multiple times
to use the same content. They want you to pay once to read the book in your
kitchen and another time to read the same book in your bedroom and another
time if you want to let your wife read it too. By definition, you've already
paid once so you're an excellent candidate to get more money out of.

The purpose of DRM is to make it hard for you to use multiple devices, hard
for you to use different platforms, and so on. So that you'll pay again. These
aren't flaws. They're design goals.

~~~
Fargren
If you are going to make claims that don't agree with what most people
believe, you should try to at least provide reasoning behind your theories, if
not proof. As it is you are just posting speculation as fact. I think you
could make a compelling argument for what you are saying, but you just...
aren't.

~~~
bad_user
Some statements are simply obvious and do not need proof.

DRM from a technological perspective is broken, simply because it uses
encryption in a wrong way ... the user being both the party that receives the
message and the third-party from which the message is protected. This means
the decryption key is easily obtained by inspecting the device's memory or
hardware or by listening to packets sent over the network. This is why to date
there is no DRM scheme that wasn't broken somehow, as the technology is
fundamentally flawed from a technical perspective.

For Kindle, here's a collection of 4,687 mostly pirated books in Mobi format
that you can copy straight to your device:
[http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/6748422/Kindle_Library___%284...](http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/6748422/Kindle_Library___%284_687_Ebooks_-
_Mobi%29) ... do you really need more proof than this?

Because really, if DRM doesn't protect against piracy, and it doesn't, then
what's its purpose, other than lock-in of legitimate customers?

And I've worked for BigCo, I know how they think. Lock-in is not something
that just happens. Lock-in is a planned process.

~~~
derefr
> Because really, if DRM doesn't protect against piracy, and it doesn't, then
> what's its purpose, other than lock-in of legitimate customers?

To give technology partners something (broken) to sell to publishers so
they'll agree, in exchange, to publish their catalogue in a digital format.
It's like giving someone a (broken) gun so they'll agree to let you go on a
date with their daughter. You know it's broken, and _they_ might even know
it's broken--but it's the act of doing a "good-faith effort" to protect the
publisher's content that matters, not the consequence of whether it gets
cracked or not.

------
spatten
A list of places to get DRM free ebooks:
[http://wiki.mobileread.com/wiki/E-book_stores#Dealers_and_Pu...](http://wiki.mobileread.com/wiki/E-book_stores#Dealers_and_Publishers_without_DRM)

~~~
danyork
Thanks for the great list!

------
ChuckMcM
If we can get the antiDRM movement coming from both content producers and
consumers, perhaps distribution will join in.

------
Prophasi
I don't love DRM, but the hyperbole could be notched down. In particular, this
cliche:

"DRM starts from the premise that all readers are slimeballs and thieves."

Such a dire pronouncement doesn't logically follow. DRM starts from the
premise that there exist many slimeballs and thieves. Next, that we should
thwart as many as we can with technology, even at the inconvenience of paying
customers, presumably yielding greater profit than in the absence of DRM.

The first assumption's undeniably true; the second is open to much debate. But
"all readers are scum" is a needlessly cynical attitude to read into it.

~~~
sp332
Well the decision is to _treat_ all customers as criminals, just the same as
if we already were criminals.

~~~
Prophasi
How so? Criminals are fined or arrested, not prompted to enter authentication
information or sync devices via this approved route.

Do you think locking your front door treats everyone else in the entire world
as a criminal?

------
nollidge
I hate DRM too, but the one area where I'm conflicted is with libraries.
There's a strong disincentive to buy if one can just download a book without
restrictions on availability or borrowing period.

~~~
smackfu
It's an interesting question. If a library buys all of the DRM-free Tor Books,
then puts them up on their website as downloadable files for their community
members, is that OK?

