| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Kindle, book revocation, and the freedom to readKindle, book revocation, and the freedom to readPosted Jan 15, 2012 22:09 UTC (Sun) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Kindle, book revocation, and the freedom to read by giraffedata Parent article: The Nook Tablet and the GPL
yes, DRM could be used that way, but that's not the common way that it's used. I don't sign up to read an e-book without purchasing it, I buy an e-book. The entire transaction is setup as a sale.
If it was only libraries that were using DRM, and the transaction was clearly structured as a temporary borrowing (with all the terms and conditions defined), with DRM used to enforce the terms. I would have no problem with DRM.
However, when a publisher charges the same or more for the e-book purchase than for the hardcover purchase, there's no justification in saying I am doing anything other than buying the book.
(Log in to post comments)
Kindle, book revocation, and the freedom to read Posted Jan 16, 2012 0:26 UTC (Mon) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] But the underlying concept that one is able to transfer less than the whole set of rights that would go with selling a traditional book is still there.
I don't sign up to read an e-book without purchasing it, I buy an e-book. The entire transaction is setup as a sale And I assume you mean to say that what it's a sale of is the equivalent of a sale of a traditional book. But I'm not sure what your point is -- I may have gotten lost in hypotheticals -- because you clearly understand that you aren't in fact doing that. You know when you buy a DRMed e-book that there are things you're not getting.
when a publisher charges the same or more for the e-book purchase than for the hardcover purchase, there's no justification in saying I am doing anything other than buying the book. The main justification is that the seller doesn't intend to sell you "the book." In our free market system, that's a whole lot of justification. We generally accept that market prices are too complex to make them the indicator of what's being sold. In fact, I have little trouble accepting that a restricted ebook is worth the same to someone as a full-rights hardcover.
Kindle, book revocation, and the freedom to read Posted Jan 16, 2012 1:30 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
you are buying in to the theory that I'm not buying a book, only buying limited rights to read the book. I see it differently.
Kindle, book revocation, and the freedom to read Posted Jan 16, 2012 3:46 UTC (Mon) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] I don't think it's a matter of theory, just definition. I think we have a semantic breakdown and we're talking past each other. I don't think we mean the same thing by "buy."
|
|
||||||||||||