We are back to "rent v own" question...
Posted Jan 19, 2012 10:19 UTC (Thu) by khim
In reply to: generic vs closed platforms
Parent article: LCA: Addressing the failure of open source
Why don't you factor the risk of a paper book getting molded, lost or stolen when you assess the DRM risk?
Why don't you factor in the cost of storing books? The odds that I will have to give up my books because I simply can't store them anymore?
I think rent/own analogue covers all these cases succinctly. If you own the book (be it physical or electronic one without DRM) then you and you alone are resposible for their future (if you can not afford to keep them or lose them dues to negligence then it's your problem - but on the flip side they can never be recalled or destroyed without your consent), if you rent it (and you can not buy DRMed book, you can only rent it) then you are limited in what you can do with it, but the losses are also covered by the real owner (you can usually readownload DRMed book on different device easily).
The more I think the more I like the explanation of FOSS as when you use proprietary software you are living in a rented apartment, when you use FOSS you live in your own house: this simple analogue covers almost all the differences in one short sentence. Proprietary software is not slavery (because you can always decide to not use it, after all), but it sure does not feel like an ownership.
to post comments)