I’ll soon write yet another post suggesting that the IDPF create a logo for the epub standard—one for nonencrypted books, with yet another version to follow if/when the group creates DRM standards.
“Some cite a general wariness with the format as the major reason the e-book fizzled so anticlimactically. Aren’t most people who buy books the types who savor sipping coffee in a bookstore, smelling the fresh paper of a printed book? Don’t avid readers enjoy coming home and curling up on the couch by the crackling hearth, a bound copy of their favorite novel nestled in their palm? And who wants to look at a fluorescent screen in their free time after they’ve done so at work for eight hours?
“A more concrete answer for the sluggish e-book takeoff can be found in the mind-boggling abundance of formats in which e-books are available and the multiple platforms for accessing them. Pair that abundance with a scarcity of actual e-book content, and you have a situation in which the public won’t show interest until there is more material available, but publishers won’t put out more material until they see more consumer demand. So all we need for the e-book revolution to take place is, theoretically, an affordable, user-friendly reading device and a large enough pool of similarly formatted e-books to justify purchase of the device.”
Heck, Tamas, the e-publishers who love DRM are already using it and giving us eBabel. The best DRM is none. But if you’re going to have it, then interoperability would help. Unless we tear down the Tower of eBabel, the e-book industry will be a shadow of what it should be. Let consumers and publishers settle the DRM issue. Anyway thanks for your feedback even if we disagree. I certainly appreciate your concerns about DRM and side with you there. But, please, let’s decouple that from the core standards issue. David
Do you remember Steve Jobs’ article on DRM – just before they started to sell DRM free music on iTunes?
One interesting point he made was that each DRM scheme is based on a secret.
So the more you try to standardize the DRM, the more “shared” this secret becomes.
Probably by the time they standardize it, it will be broken.
I think digital content providers (this includes publishers) should acknowledge that DRM is not the solution and should try to answer the real question: if not DRM then what ?
Well, Tamas, that’s exactly what I’ve been saying–that DRM isn’t an optimal solution, given the Catch 22s. Social DRM could be a compromise, even if it’s hardly perfect. At least it wouldn’t interfere with interoperability. Meanwhile, given the complexities of arriving at a standard incorporating DRM, it’s time for an epub1 logo! Enough eBabel! We shouldn’t have to wait until the DRM question is settled for publishers insisting on it. Thanks. – D
"D2C will stand little chance against the ease of a megastore (for customers) until contract clauses that ban authors/publishers from selling their ebooks for less ..."
I’ll soon write yet another post suggesting that the IDPF create a logo for the epub standard—one for nonencrypted books, with yet another version to follow if/when the group creates DRM standards.
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
So after they finally agreed to zip HTML files they would quickly sit down and try to standardize DRM? How sad is that!
Heck, Tamas, the e-publishers who love DRM are already using it and giving us eBabel. The best DRM is none. But if you’re going to have it, then interoperability would help. Unless we tear down the Tower of eBabel, the e-book industry will be a shadow of what it should be. Let consumers and publishers settle the DRM issue. Anyway thanks for your feedback even if we disagree. I certainly appreciate your concerns about DRM and side with you there. But, please, let’s decouple that from the core standards issue. David
Most people who buy lots of books I am sure would rather spend the money on books than horribly overpriced coffee.
A lot of us live where there is no need for a fire.
A lot of people will be looking at this forum in their free time, presumably on a screen.
Do you remember Steve Jobs’ article on DRM – just before they started to sell DRM free music on iTunes?
One interesting point he made was that each DRM scheme is based on a secret.
So the more you try to standardize the DRM, the more “shared” this secret becomes.
Probably by the time they standardize it, it will be broken.
I think digital content providers (this includes publishers) should acknowledge that DRM is not the solution and should try to answer the real question: if not DRM then what ?
Well, Tamas, that’s exactly what I’ve been saying–that DRM isn’t an optimal solution, given the Catch 22s. Social DRM could be a compromise, even if it’s hardly perfect. At least it wouldn’t interfere with interoperability. Meanwhile, given the complexities of arriving at a standard incorporating DRM, it’s time for an epub1 logo! Enough eBabel! We shouldn’t have to wait until the DRM question is settled for publishers insisting on it. Thanks. – D