The utterly absurd and discredited idea of DRM being “for honest people”? I can’t believe this canard is still being put up after it’s been shown in other DRM-loving industries such as music that it’s *not the honest people* you have to worry about!

DRM *makes* honest people into dishonest people all the time, it encourages them to break the (letter of the) law, because of the disadvantages it forces them to put up with vs the much friendlier, more useful (and free!) pirated versions of the same digital works.

Many people use DRM crackers simply to remove the restrictions on works they have purchased legally (most DRM cracker software only works with the legitimate decoding key(s) for the work in question, you can only unlock what you’ve already bought) and don’t intend to distribute it to all and sundry via filesharing networks or anything like that. They just want to be able to move their purchased content to devices they choose in the format they choose instead of being restricted by the seller’s list of approved devices and continuing support, always wondering if one day the seller will simply yank their property away from them, or go broke and closedown their DRM servers making the customer’s legally purchased product suddenly unusable.

The idea that as ebooks become more mainstream people will just accept DRM’s restrictions is sheer fantasy, it didn’t happen with music and it won’t happen with books either. In fact persisting with DRM will simply ensure the growth and mainstreaming of e-books will be restricted and e-books will never achieve their potential (I’ve always suspected that’s what many major publishers really want – they just want the whole e-book, internet, computer thing to go away and leave them alone in their comfortable 19th century world of paper and ink). Long term, as the publishing world’s traditional print customer base die off and are replaced by a generation used to getting their entertainment and information from the web on their computers and handheld devices, that’s simply suicidal.

Another argument he makes that really holds little water is the interoperability argument (i.e., we can’t play records on our tape players or use 5.25″ floppies in modern computers, so why should we complain about not being able to read books accross devices.). The basic problem here is that in most of the examples he gives, there are infact legal methods of transfering the media to a format that can be used. If I am really in love with Word Perfect 5.1, I can still load it on a computer running MS Windows and it will run (or I can use an emulator on other systems). Likewise, if I have a record I want on CD, there is technology that will allow me to do that. In contrast, DRM prevents transfering between book readers.

What is also interesting is that he admits that the younger generation, the generation who have not yet adopted the Kindle are the most likely to illegally download files. Ultimately, that is the group that publishing must convince of the value of buying books. They are the customers of the future. The publishing industry would be wise to do all it can to lower the cost of entry into ebooks for them, and to give them as few incentives as possible to pirate books. If the industry doesn’t recognize in the next year or two that their current models are not working, then they will never bother to opt into the system.

The big issue and the one that drm obscures is if you can make money from e-content without a physical container; some money, sure, big money unproven so far and whatever the music industry does, their revenue still is going down on a fast slope, same with newspapers while books so far resist since they are mostly print and movies have theater releases as main revenue with the big size of the files against current internet speed still offering some protection but once a 1GB will be downloadble as fast as 1MB on broadband today that will change…

I just do not see how the revenue downwards spiral will be stopped until there will be an equilibrium at a much lower point than today. How this will shake out who knows, but content will still be there as long as society is prosperous…

The issue of cloud data – I think that Mr Shatzkin is way too utopian for various reasons in the near term future, while in the longer term we are all dead as the saying goes so who knows…But I strongly doubt we will see the cloud computing as envisioned there within the next 20 years so it truly does not make sense to plan for it

So publishers gotta pray that Kindle and the like do not become cheap and widespread enough and movie makers that really fast broadband does not come, while music and newspapers are done as they are constituted now – this of course does not mean we won’t have them, just that right now it is unclear how, maybe as subsidiaries of future Googles and such, maybe on afar less revenue scale…

DRM also means less competition in the ebook and ebook reader device markets. Mike deals with lock-in by saying it’s a win for the devicemaker. It’s a loss for everybody else, though.

I also think his points about the need for DRM to avoid catastrophe are overblown or wrong given what happened to music. DRM has been removed, prices have been raised, sales are still strong (at least that’s what we’ve heard so far). Digital music files are worth more without DRM! Has piracy increased? Pretty sure it’s on the decline.

Thanks,
David

He may be overly optimistic on the prospects of cloud computing and social networks, whereas I by default discount by 90% any predictions about future tech and paradigms; there are a lot of luddites out there, especially in places of power.

I think he understates the value of DRM, even now, because DRM is essential to online libraries.

I think he correctly points out that a lot of folks over-value DRM-free and for the exact reasons he states; we are still in the early adopter phase of ebook evolution and we have not yet reached a situation where the ebook buyer demographics reflect the at-large population.

He correctly points out that the bulk of DRM-is-evil resistance is coming from people who are not representative of the general population and that if ebooks do become a mainstream form of publishing the resistance to DRM will perforce be reduced, not grow.

And, above all, he points out that there is DRM and then there is DRM.

The real issue as has often been point out is not DRM vs zero DRM, but rather obnoxious, intrussive DRM versus reasonable, flexible DRM.

Examples of the latter can be found all over but one that has recently been in the spotlight comes from the videogame industry where XBOX is supplementing their DVD-based distribution system with an online od-demand sale system. Their licensing terms, for all purchased content (as opposed to their rentals–they do both) as straightforward.
Purchased content is licensed at a dual level:
- the user identity has license to the content on any console.
- alternately, any user identity on the console that bought the content has access.
Add in that the licensed identity can redownload the content at will on any console and you pretty much cover all user needs with minimal inconvenience.

Games are not books but similar arrangements can be crafted, *if* the (ultimately) fruitless absolutist campaigns can be ended and rational discussion engaged in what are reasonable usage models for ebooks and what are reasonable terms for licensing them.

Mr Shatzkin’s column might even be a good place to start a true dialogue between publishers and readers.

I sure hope there are more like him out there…