Analyzing Amazon's E-Book Loan Agreement 214
conel writes "The Economist has a knowledgeable mainstream take on the restrictions publishers are forcing on e-books. From the article: 'They wish you to engage in two separate hallucinations. First, that their limited license to read a work on a device or within software of their choosing is equivalent to the purchase of a physical item. Second, that the vast majority of e-books are persistent objects rather than disposable culture. ... Just as with music, DRM will be cracked. As more people possess portable reading devices, the demand and availability for pirated content will also rise. (Many popular e-books can now be found easily on file-sharing sites, something that was not the case even a few months ago, as Adrian Hon recently pointed out.)"
Re:Doing it wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, I like ebooks, but I do expect to be able to use them as I please. I like the way that O'reilly media handles their ebooks. The specifics depends a bit on the book, but most of the recent books are available via several different formats, including epub. My main complaint is that if you buy the book through their store rather than the android market that there seems to be no way of converting between the two.
Re:Treat Digital Copies Like Books (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a bit harder than you might think..
If my personal vault of ebooks dies, how do I transfer them to someone? Or, is that the logical equivalent of my house burning down with all the contents?
Frankly, the probability of my ebook reader dying/getting lost/stolen/destroyed is MUCH higher than my house, not to mention that paper books have a fairly decent lifetime. I've got books that are 100 years old and still perfectly usable. Yes, I also have paperback trash that is falling apart after a decade or so. However, reading my 20 year old emedia (5 1/4" floppies anyone?) might be a bit of a chore, and reading eMedia from 1980 (8" floppies) would be a real chore.
The lifetime of media/reader thing could be easy to deal with if you let me freely make copies onto new formats as they become available (e.g. burn all those 5 1/4" floppy images onto CDROM, along with the software to read them), but it's really hard to make it easy for me to make copies but not easy for me to give free copies to my friends.
Re:old school piracy. (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, I remember getting my first black and white PDA like 9 years ago and being so excited that I could read books on it.
I still have them, thousands of downloaded books, sitting around in a folder somewhere probably taking less than 100 megs of space.
I managed to get all of the Discworld, Sword of truth series, and Douglas adam's books plus a couple of series that aren't in print anymore. All before the kindle was even a glint in Amazon's eye.
When you're dealing with that kind of dedication to scan information, Ebooks and piracy aren't linked. Sure, you're making it slightly easier for them to do so, but at least your giving legitimate customers the ability to purchase them.
Re:old school piracy. (Score:4, Interesting)
What i find most interesting in all this was the news that when the last book of the harry potter series was released, it took german fans 48 hours to scan, translate and distribute a german ebook version.
Re:What's wrong? (Score:2, Interesting)
it seems like lots of other people want us to engage in another hallucination: that giving out unlimited copies won't turn into a financial problem for booksellers.
I guess you've never heard of Baen Publishing? They have been giving out free copies of books for years, and not just one or two, but hundreds of popular, current books. The put CDs in their hardback books with a copy of a lot of that authors work, plus other, plus the book you just bought and ask you to distribute copies of the CD. They aren't going out of business.
Re:What's wrong? (Score:1, Interesting)
It's a one time 14 day loan, you can't loan the same book twice. That's absurd.
If it were just a 14 day loan it would be a bit ridiculous, but not completely unacceptable.
There's nothing stopping you from just lending your friend your e-book reader.
Re:One publisher seems to have a clue... (Score:5, Interesting)
Their free ebook program has pretty conclusively proven that books that are past their peak sales mark (usually 2-6 months after first publish) see a substantial increase in sales after publishing the ebook for free.
Don't hide it, promote [baen.com] it!
The prime palaver section really details why this works, but the lengthy introduction on the front page is good enough for it to make sense to most people.
This quote really sums up the real problem quite nicely:
Income doesn't derive from preventing theft, it comes from making sales. A certain amount of loss due to theft is simply one of the overhead costs. Obviously, taking simple measures to eliminate as much theft as possible is sensible. But at a certain point -- and much sooner than you might think -- the measures you take to prevent theft can start cutting your income.
Re:What's wrong? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm really starting to believe that we could completely do away with copyrights and things would change very little. Musicians would still sell music, authors would still sell books. Lawyers would be the big losers, as would a few of the conglomerates that have divisions with the sole purpose of owning other peoples' intellectual property. Other than that, the world would go on pretty much as before.
I'm still waiting to see any real data that shows the damages from widespread file sharing of copyrighted materials.
Re:E-books more expensive than paper (Score:3, Interesting)
Where are you seeing these prices for new Sci-Fi? Last I looked they sure as hell weren't $6. All of them I've wanted have been higher with a little love note from Amazon pointing out that the price is now set by the F'ing publisher. Some of them were even more expensive than new paper books. The industry has gone the way of the music industry so far as I'm concerned. Screw 'em.
Here's an example from the action stuff I've been reading lately - check the paper and Kindle pricing. http://www.amazon.com/The-Spy-ebook/dp/B0038BZOYA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1289098451&sr=1-2 [amazon.com]
Another - http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Empire-Fargo-Adventure-ebook/dp/B003XQEVD0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1289098451&sr=1-1 [amazon.com]
NYT Bestseller - Hardcover is CHEAPER than eBook -> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZK58WM/ref=s9_al_bw_ir01?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=1YNQWHDQP69J4JEHSTCP&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1278657562&pf_rd_i=322189011 [amazon.com]
Here's one I wanted to read pretty badly - http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Dust-Masters-Disguise-Operations/dp/0743428528/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289098993&sr=8-1-catcorr [amazon.com] Note the date it was released.....
Thankfully some authors are taking notice of this guy http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] and you'll also note that often the highest sellers on the Kindle lists are lower priced - like this guy's work. He even gives away some books on his site. Sadly it's just not my kind of writing but he sure does tell it like it is on his blog! The publishers are screwing us and the authors and piracy is ramping up as a result!
Re:What's wrong? (Score:3, Interesting)
I did by books at one point it time but I'm in a situation now where I don't have a lot of shelf space and I find e-books more convenient. The first time (and last time) I bought a e-book was a nightmare. I chose the Adobe PDF format because it was only format that was available on just about any platform. The provider would not EVEN RESPOND to my complaints regarding the undisclosed DRM which made it unusable on my Linux Laptop. Never again.
If I want a book these days I'll pirate it or get it from the library. Never really understood the difference. Yes, the first is illegal and I really don't care. If the choice was paying for DRM'ed crap or not reading it -- I just wouldn't read it. The reason they are losing my money is DRM not piracy.
Re:What's wrong? (Score:4, Interesting)
Each agreement will state in appropriately scary legalese that it authorizes the purchaser of the book to lend the book once, for a period of 14 days to one individual of their choice. Upon completion of the 14 day period the lender is legally obligated to recover the book from the lendee, even if their not done reading it yet, and that they are legally prohibited from ever lending that book again.
Then place these lending agreements, one (and one only) per book at every book store they can get them into.
We can complain about it all we want here in cyberspace, but the only way to really point out how flawed these "Lending programs" really are is to let hard copy buyers feel the same frustration at such ridiculous rules which totally violate the right of first sale.
If you figure out how to make a profit off this idea, I want a can of Mt. Dew as payment for use of my intellectual property of the idea.
Re:What's wrong? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't find anything wrong with the lend program. I realize Slashdot has a certain "information should be free" ethos, but it doesn't make much sense to build in the ability to give unlimited copies to everyone and think that it won't undermine the business.
You have managed to TOTALLY miss the point here.
B&N and Amazon have developed a mechanism which would support lending books, but preventing the lender from reading it while it was on load. They have a mechanize to make an e-book exactly line a printed book.
The ebook is locked on the lender's kindle/nook for the duration of the lend.
So there is no "unlimited copies" nonsense.
Its just like a printed book. You lend it, you don't have it. Wait till you get it back and lend it again. Or give it away. Your book, your choice.
See the difference?
Re:I hope it's the beginning of a good thing... (Score:3, Interesting)
Are you kidding? The ability to lend a book once for 14 days if the publisher allows it? How is that a good thing?
It's so ridiculously restricted it's essentially useless.
And only once. Never ever again to the same kindle device. As if loaning it twice somehow is worse than once. I can see an automatic return after 14 days (I'd love that with real books; too many loaners gone for good), but the only once thing makes it heinous.
Re:Treat Digital Copies Like Books (Score:4, Interesting)
Your way way way off.
From the very beginning we needed to treat books like digital copies. Hundreds of years ago I would have bought the argument that the act of creating the book took as much or more effort than writing it. The printing press forever changed that.
Where you have already gone down the wrong path is a fundamental misunderstanding, or complete disregard, for copyright law.
1) All intellectual property at the moment of creation belongs The People . This is to ensure that we always possess a rich culture of art, literature, and technology. After all, everything is created by building on the works of others. Perhaps the very first cave dude that invented fire might be able to claim true originality, but I am sure there was some cave dude before that who figured out that living in caves was better.
2) In our current society, at the moment of creation, We The People grant a number of limited and specific rights to the creator. This is copyright law, and in some cases, patent law. As a people, we decided it was in our best interests to temporarily allow the creators control over their works. Distribution, profits, etc. It was never meant to be permanent.
Your idea involves, quite simplistically, technology and law that should not exist. The only way to implement your idea is to lock down so-called cyberspace into a totalitarian regime of complete and utter control. For without this complete and utter control, DRM is doomed to failure. We can shake our fists against the Pirates, but they are simply representing the true behavior of our society; we love to share information. For good or bad, this behavior will persist and continue despite our constant ethical debates in various forums.
Furthermore, it is absolutely evident that these controls (often DRM), grant the creator effective rights and control beyond the scope and intent of copyright law .
The vast majority of the populace simply lives in ignorance. That is simply a state of being, and not a character flaw. Few understand the true implications of the cyberspace we created. Society created an additional dimension. It has its own topology, its own space, and very clearly interacts with the physical world we live in. Consider SCADA systems that are supposedly protected, personal and confidential data held in various spaces, e-commerce, virtual online worlds, etc. It goes on and on. Cyberspace can clearly be affected by our actions here, and actions in Cyberspace can profoundly affect us, regardless of whether we initiated them or were even aware of them.
We would need to completely dominate that space in order to ensure that governments could control it. Cyberspace could not exist according to the ideals of Freedom, Privacy, and Anonymity in order to control it on a large scale.
THAT is what people are missing. You are growing up, living out your life, and people are still yet to be born, in our new world with little practical knowledge of this new dimension of our existence. In the name of Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, Ignorance, and Greed we are handing over the keys, and the very control, over this critical dimension of our lives with barely an acknowledgment.
I know, it sounds crazy and intense, and how much tin foil do I have on my head right? It can't really be that complicated right? You would be so wrong.
You need to choose which is more important. Locking down Cyberspace in order to effect these controls on it, or making sure that we will remain free.
*******
Your idea is not treating digital copies like books either. You simply misunderstand what a book really is. It is, quite simply, a physical medium in which the copyrighted material can be enjoyed. That enjoyment is entitled by rights given to you from the copyright holder. One could say, the book is proof of your rights.
What we really need is for all copyrighted material to be sold with what am
Re:What's wrong? (Score:1, Interesting)
> For example, how many students are really going to buy their own digital copies of their textbooks, as opposed to passing around one copy for everyone?
In several kinds of on-line classes, eBooks are bundled into the cost of the course or added as a mandatory "materials fee". So, how many students will buy their own digital copies? ALL OF THEM.
Of course, despite the mandatory payment, the copies they buy are still DRM-restricted. It's a great way to screw the people who pay.
What's Steamed? (Score:1, Interesting)
I realize Slashdot has a certain "information should be free" ethos
I think you are mistaken. There may be a few people who believe this, but my observation has been that the vast majority of Slashdotters are much more concerned about the right of first sale, which DRM-encumbered digital downloads do not currently allow. There's no way I'm going to spend $10 or $20 on an e-book if I can't sell it to someone when I'm done with it.
If true then Slashdot would be badmouthing Steam left and right. Do you see any badmouthing?
Re:What's wrong? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What's wrong? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's drifted quite a bit. At one time the implication of "information wants to be free" was related to "water wants to flow downhill" or "a gas wants to expand to fill it's container". It's just the natural order of things that if a single control on information fails anywhere just once, it's free. That's all. The Free Software movement pointed that out simply to show that Free Software is information in it's natural state.
Another sense of the phrase is economic. The marginal cost of copying information is practically zero, so from an economic standpoint, that's what it should cost in a free market.
Of course, producing the very first copy is not nearly free. From an economic standpoint, the market SHOULD be coming up with a way for people to pay for that first copy to be created directly rather than greatly overcharging for the copying but paying nothing for the part that is actually worth something. That process is being delayed as distributors cling desperately to the old now broken model using increasingly draconian laws and ever more complex and expensive DRM to create an artificial scarcity their model needs.
Interestingly, most of the rabid free market crowd carefully avoids recognizing copyright as a HUGE manipulation of the market.
Re:I hope it's the beginning of a good thing... (Score:3, Interesting)
Your statement that ebooks are licensed not owned is not borne out by the terms of sale.
Go check out the book seller web sites.
Harry fake potter... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I hope it's the beginning of a good thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
I notice that you still left this right undefined, and continue to describe it in vague terms.
What about devices that can only download content because they are incapable of transmitting a signal?
What about NDA-covered material?
What about other agreements, like employment? Should you be able to lend your job to someone else?
Would you allow "book brokers" that dramatically over-provision books, and allow people to rent books with minute-level granularity?
Can you rent out individual pages?
What about a physical book? Is the binding itself in violation, because it prevents you from lending individual pages?
What about lending to someone with different media? Can someone with an e-book lend it to someone as a physical book? What constitutes the "same" media versus "different" media? What about different revisions of the same device?
What about software bugs, old/new display formats, or malfunctions?
Re:What's wrong? (Score:3, Interesting)
Here they get nothing. Unless you account the small royalty for the initial purchase of the books and I think most are donated copies anyway.
If they want my money they should encourage their publishers to provide the content in acceptable formats. Most of the books I read, not all, I would be happy to pay a fair amount for a book in a decent format (no drm, works almost anywhere).
One book that was released last month was available in a acceptable format but due to piracy concerns the author held the e-book release for months after the audio book/paper book release. The audio book was up for torrent in a few hours and a scanned/OCR version of the paper book was available within a week. The net result was I read the OCR version instead of paying for the e-book. I would have paid just so I wouldn't have had to wait a week. Why would I pay to wait months?
Re:What's wrong? (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, I was unclear. By "decriminalized," I meant the end result of being ONLY decrimalized - no civil remedy. IOW:
* no statutory civil penalties
* no punitive or compensatory damages
* criminal penalties in normal cases treated as a minor infraction similar to a parking ticket, no jail time, minimal fine.
So for example, if you are caught torrenting 10 mp3s, you might get a $500 fine at most, and the copyright holder is not permitted to file suit on its own behalf. The end result being that the copyright holders would have no incentive to enforce their copyright at all against private citizens, and so even the minimal fines would rarely be collected for want of reporting the crime.
And, about the DRM, you sound confused if you think that people need to individually break their own DRM for every book they want to read. A person doesn't need to know how to decrypt Apple or Amazon's book formats when they can easily type in the name of a book plus "torrent" into a search engine. Downloading isn't esoteric knowledge anymore, least of all for people who own Kindles and other such devices.