I have posted comments on the following pages:
Monday, June 6, 2011
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Ethics Post #3: DRM andLicensing Limitations
Ebooks and ereaders have become a popular way to have multiple books at your fingertips. They provide you with the ease of many titles in a lightweight package. DRM or Digital Rights Management, is a method that controls access to digital copyrighted material. The copyright holder can restrict copying and also, printing the material it has the rights to. It was put into place so epiracy could be limited or at least slowed down; and so that publishers and authors received the proper funds for their work. In researching this topic, I found that ereader users and publishers are at either end of the spectrum. Users feel it deters them from purchasing one, because of too many restrictions on their purchased material. As for the publishers, they of course love having this technology. They feel that users who follow proper protocol shouldn't notice the added restrictions. I came across a blog written by ereader users that clearly state many of the complaints of DRM and address their views as users who do not participate in epiracy. I had no idea that there were so many different ereaders out there but, one ereader cannot handle all the ebook formats that are available. Kindle is limited to their devices or software and Microsoft LIT formats can only be read on Windows devices. There are some formats like Adobe, that can be used on different platforms.
This begs the question, would I be locked into one content provider of can I pick and chose from others to get lower prices and different content? Taking into consideration the amount of ebook providers that are out there, they all try to entice you with appealing deals. The offers vary from how you can print or share material, how many titles are available, pricing, how they are displayed, etc.. Even though hey have an array of options per provider your are ultimately locked in by the parameters of a certain provider. I do not however, think it is ethical for a publisher to limit the users content simply because, you as the user purchased it. The providers set the price so why restrict me once I have paid for the material. It is absurd. If I buy a paperback or hardback copy it is mine to do with as I please. The ereaders are ultimately a bigger investment, so I should be able to do what I want with it. There are some companies (like Sony) that have made positive changes to their DRM. They make it possible to display books from other stores on their ereaders. Whether or not you will incur extra charges when transferring content varies by device. When you want to upgrade your device you inevitably have to pay extra just for the device and when you want to transfer from ebooks between two different devices DRM encryption makes it very complicated.
Publishers, in my opinion, cannot claim compliance with IDPF standards and practices. IDPF (International Digital Publishing Forum) uses EPUB. This sets guidelines for publishers that allow, at least in theory, the ability to exchange digital material. Publishers have used DRM as a loophole that enables them to restrict the use of your purchase. I did find sites that offer ebooks free of DRM encryption which leads me to believe they were epiracy sites. I think the fact that these sites are available proves that forms of piracy do exist because of the tight restrictions DRM has on any given content. Apparently, epiracy isn't all that hard. I personally do not have an ereader but just investigating this topic I have come across several ways to get unencrypted books on the web. It can be compared to iTunes and Limewire in the respect that iTunes is a licensed site that requires payment for digital media where as Limewire (which no longer exists under this name) offers free downloads. Just entering ebooks or ereaders, in the search engine leads you to sites that make it available to get your hands on a book that otherwise wouldn't be available under your current ebook options.
It is true that certain ereaders allow lending between purchasers, and why not? Like I stated before, if I paid for it I should be able to do what I want with it. This goes for lending between two different platforms as well. If publishers feel so strongly about lending and losing money they can set a standard unlimited lending rate for users. This way it is the users option to "borrow" a book from someone or purchase it themselves. Depending on how often you read this may be a viable option for a person who likes to read friends suggestions as apposed to searching out a book independently. Ebooks do have subscriptions that last for a predetermined amount of time. Usually a person will have plenty of time to read it but if you are like me, a good book is worth keeping forever. Thus, an ereader would only aid in not having to lug around a heavy backpack for school. With books on paper, I can go back and read it as many times as I want. It is mine for life. I also think there should be an option from publishers to keep a book for the lifetime of the account for an added price. For example, a subscription would cost $12.99 for a book but to keep it without the subscription, would cost $32.99. This of curse could be costly but people seem to look past price just to have the convenience an ereader offers.
The HarperCollins 26+ decision dictates the repurchasing of ebooks by libraries after the 26th time a particular book is checked out. This is in no way fair to libraries. To me 26 checkouts is not a high enough number to allot to a library. They are finding themselves having to repurchase an ebook multiple times depending on how popular the book is. The argument is an ebook can "outlast" a hard or paperback copy; which is simply not true. Publishers should at least do research on how much traffic a particular location gets. This way they could apply a better formula for ebook purchasing. The newer or more popular ebooks could have a higher number attached to the limit of borrowers so as to offset the cost to libraries. The inverse would apply to books not read as often. Let's be honest, publishing houses are making money across the board so giving libraries a break shows a sign of good working business relationships. A librarian would be more apt to introduce ebooks as an option to a novice reader which in turn would keep the ebook trend growing. I do not think this particular application by HarperCollins will increase epiracy only because it applies to libraries. I think it would just be too risky for multiple locations gaining access to pirated books without signaling a red flag to publishers when they see their ebook purchases drop.
After all the research, I definitely would not be interested in purchasing an ereader. I practically grew up in a library; I was always surrounded by books. I love the feel, their smell, and even the crackling of the spine when you open a hardcover book. Even the act of turning each page to get to the next seems artificial on an ereader. If I absolutely had to purchase one, I would probably chose a Kindle. Mostly because I have seen that they offer free classics (some of my favorites are on that list) and I can access my ebooks via the Kindle app on my smartphone. The prices on Amazon don't seem to be too outrageous but, the deal breaker for me is the inability to share with all platforms. It was very interesting to learn about ebooks and ereaders, though it definitely cemented one simple fact for me. When I want to read a book I'd rather just pick it up then have to download it and deal with the headache of a publisher's DRM on my purchase.
This begs the question, would I be locked into one content provider of can I pick and chose from others to get lower prices and different content? Taking into consideration the amount of ebook providers that are out there, they all try to entice you with appealing deals. The offers vary from how you can print or share material, how many titles are available, pricing, how they are displayed, etc.. Even though hey have an array of options per provider your are ultimately locked in by the parameters of a certain provider. I do not however, think it is ethical for a publisher to limit the users content simply because, you as the user purchased it. The providers set the price so why restrict me once I have paid for the material. It is absurd. If I buy a paperback or hardback copy it is mine to do with as I please. The ereaders are ultimately a bigger investment, so I should be able to do what I want with it. There are some companies (like Sony) that have made positive changes to their DRM. They make it possible to display books from other stores on their ereaders. Whether or not you will incur extra charges when transferring content varies by device. When you want to upgrade your device you inevitably have to pay extra just for the device and when you want to transfer from ebooks between two different devices DRM encryption makes it very complicated.
Publishers, in my opinion, cannot claim compliance with IDPF standards and practices. IDPF (International Digital Publishing Forum) uses EPUB. This sets guidelines for publishers that allow, at least in theory, the ability to exchange digital material. Publishers have used DRM as a loophole that enables them to restrict the use of your purchase. I did find sites that offer ebooks free of DRM encryption which leads me to believe they were epiracy sites. I think the fact that these sites are available proves that forms of piracy do exist because of the tight restrictions DRM has on any given content. Apparently, epiracy isn't all that hard. I personally do not have an ereader but just investigating this topic I have come across several ways to get unencrypted books on the web. It can be compared to iTunes and Limewire in the respect that iTunes is a licensed site that requires payment for digital media where as Limewire (which no longer exists under this name) offers free downloads. Just entering ebooks or ereaders, in the search engine leads you to sites that make it available to get your hands on a book that otherwise wouldn't be available under your current ebook options.
It is true that certain ereaders allow lending between purchasers, and why not? Like I stated before, if I paid for it I should be able to do what I want with it. This goes for lending between two different platforms as well. If publishers feel so strongly about lending and losing money they can set a standard unlimited lending rate for users. This way it is the users option to "borrow" a book from someone or purchase it themselves. Depending on how often you read this may be a viable option for a person who likes to read friends suggestions as apposed to searching out a book independently. Ebooks do have subscriptions that last for a predetermined amount of time. Usually a person will have plenty of time to read it but if you are like me, a good book is worth keeping forever. Thus, an ereader would only aid in not having to lug around a heavy backpack for school. With books on paper, I can go back and read it as many times as I want. It is mine for life. I also think there should be an option from publishers to keep a book for the lifetime of the account for an added price. For example, a subscription would cost $12.99 for a book but to keep it without the subscription, would cost $32.99. This of curse could be costly but people seem to look past price just to have the convenience an ereader offers.
The HarperCollins 26+ decision dictates the repurchasing of ebooks by libraries after the 26th time a particular book is checked out. This is in no way fair to libraries. To me 26 checkouts is not a high enough number to allot to a library. They are finding themselves having to repurchase an ebook multiple times depending on how popular the book is. The argument is an ebook can "outlast" a hard or paperback copy; which is simply not true. Publishers should at least do research on how much traffic a particular location gets. This way they could apply a better formula for ebook purchasing. The newer or more popular ebooks could have a higher number attached to the limit of borrowers so as to offset the cost to libraries. The inverse would apply to books not read as often. Let's be honest, publishing houses are making money across the board so giving libraries a break shows a sign of good working business relationships. A librarian would be more apt to introduce ebooks as an option to a novice reader which in turn would keep the ebook trend growing. I do not think this particular application by HarperCollins will increase epiracy only because it applies to libraries. I think it would just be too risky for multiple locations gaining access to pirated books without signaling a red flag to publishers when they see their ebook purchases drop.
After all the research, I definitely would not be interested in purchasing an ereader. I practically grew up in a library; I was always surrounded by books. I love the feel, their smell, and even the crackling of the spine when you open a hardcover book. Even the act of turning each page to get to the next seems artificial on an ereader. If I absolutely had to purchase one, I would probably chose a Kindle. Mostly because I have seen that they offer free classics (some of my favorites are on that list) and I can access my ebooks via the Kindle app on my smartphone. The prices on Amazon don't seem to be too outrageous but, the deal breaker for me is the inability to share with all platforms. It was very interesting to learn about ebooks and ereaders, though it definitely cemented one simple fact for me. When I want to read a book I'd rather just pick it up then have to download it and deal with the headache of a publisher's DRM on my purchase.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)