LWN: Comments on "KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices"

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Tue, 03 May 2022 17:40:50 +0000

> where you have 40% of poverty and bittorrent has been the go-to place to get movies and shows for years [... ] it's easy to see it isn't because of DRM that most of those who can pay the fee use Netflix, but because of the convenience and feed it provides

The entire purpose of DRM is to make _inconvenient_ to share content safely between friends. So yes even in your country it helps a bit.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

sammythesnake — Sun, 01 May 2022 16:26:15 +0000

I have the Netflix plugin working in Kodi on my Debian box without drama, do you might want to consider that. I have a login, of course.

It doesn't deal very gracefully with my weak internet connection when it's in a bad mood, though. A download option would be nice so I could just watch the whole program when it eventually finishes downloading rather than have to watch it in wee chunks as I catch up to the download and have to wait for it to get ahead again.

Several other streaming services have plugins for Kodi but I front have logins to try others :-P

Honestly, the user interface for pirate bay/bittorrent is still miles ahead of DVDs (ironically, non-pirates are still the only ones who have to sit through unskipable anti-piracy scaremongering!) and even though streaming services are much better than they used to be, they're still far too add-rich for my liking. If I'm paying for content, I feel entitled to have no adverts or other crap I front want foisted on me...

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mrugiero — Sat, 30 Apr 2022 16:19:39 +0000

> Hence DRM as a mitigation. DRM = better than not making any money at all.

Tho now that I think of it, in countries where there's actual prosecution of piracy it may be a good mitigation. I often forget countries like Germany actually enforce laws. Here there's _technically_ a law, but in reality they only apply it for commercial uses (a disco using music without paying the copyright enforcement agency, a company using pirated software in their work stations), nobody bothers anybody else. You won't get a fine or anything like that even if you have terabytes of shows being seeded on bittorrent. I know because I know people who ideologically oppose to copyright and do that.

In my personal case, I have a privileged position for my country, as programmers tend to have relative to their country in almost every country. I do pirate a few things mostly for convenience (and in some cases because I'm cheap when the show/movie is the only one I want from that service and I don't want a monthly fee for something I may watch once a year), but most I pay because I believe in it, I know if nobody pays it's a tragedy of the commons that I'd much rather avoid. But certainly it isn't DRM stopping me, not even close.
Some shows I technically both pay and pirate because sometimes I watch them at a friend's home and a service I paid provides it but I don't want to go through the hassle of logging in their TV (sometimes it isn't even an option because the app is not supported in the TV or the TV, in fewer cases as I mostly watch them with the same friend, isn't even smart; again, poor country, hardware is most often dated and software services providers deprecate support quickly).
In the specific case of games, because I'd rather lend it to a few friends and only just now learned that I can do that with Steam, I generally pay a premium to get it from GOG without DRM. Sometimes I do prefer Steam because the prices are adjusted to our cost of living, they may be 10x cheaper or more than in GOG. GOG is also a bit inconvenient because I need to authorize explicitly by phone call every purchase I make that is charged in dollars, and because it forces me to do it with a credit card rather than debit (I like to have stuff reflected instantly on my account to make sure I don't overspend, I always prefer debit). Luckily I don't play enough for that to be a major problem.
Music I pay everything, even if I'd rather not pay some (as mentioned in my first comment), because Spotify is simply more convenient. Maybe with the exception of one or two songs that are unavailable, but even those I listen on YouTube rather than from illegitimate download.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mrugiero — Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:54:00 +0000

> Money is extremely subjective and I really, really doubt the hundreds of millions of people sharing a streaming password in the USA can actually not pay for their own subscription.

And FWIW this is precisely one of the problem community projects suffer from as well. People choose not to donate not because they can't or because they find no use for the software, but because they can get away with it.

But at least in my country, where you have 40% of poverty and bittorrent has been the go-to place to get movies and shows for years, it's easy to see it isn't because of DRM that most of those who can pay the fee use Netflix, but because of the convenience and feed it provides. DRM is simply irrelevant, you can find torrents for everything. Even the non-tech-savvy have and use pirated options here, as they use strem.io. When they pick Netflix over that, it's for the recommendations and the streaming quality (subs are complicated in strem.io, you may have buffering issues, etc).

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mrugiero — Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:40:42 +0000

> If I don't pay the guy cleaning my gutters then it does very much take from him the time he would have used to clean someone else's and the money he would have been correctly paid.

Exactly. With software stuff compounds. The salary often comes from assuming a certain number of sales. The effort is still there and you should pay for it.

> Laws that depend on whom you like: that's a very interesting legal and fairness concept.

Laws don't. Ethics are much more subjective.

> or you can't pay for the stuff and would thus make no difference to the author

> This one is a bit more logical but I'm afraid the definition of "can't pay" is still very subjective. I lived with people who "could not" pay their $15 share of a monthly bill after partying most of the month or going to Starbucks every single morning (cause you know, the free company's coffee really sucks...) and I also know they were not that extraordinary at all, heard plenty of similar stories.

Certainly. I can never know, so I don't judge on an individual level.

> Money is extremely subjective and I really, really doubt the hundreds of millions of people sharing a streaming password in the USA can actually not pay for their own subscription.

I agree 100%. I see it everyday.

> Some yes, hundreds of millions, no. Inequalities are growing fast but I don't think hundreds of millions of people in the USA struggle to put food on the table, at least not yet. Hence DRM as a mitigation. DRM = better than not making any money at all.

The USA is not the only country on Earth. I agree on DRM being a mitigation, it didn't come from under a tree. But just look for a torrent of just about anything and see it doesn't work. The only people that have it harder is the common folk who weren't that likely to commit mass piracy anyway.

> I bet most of us have seen newspapers begging for a monthly subscription which is "only the price of a sandwich"

The price of a sandwich in the US is about 10% of a regular apartment rent where I live. And while I mentioned I know plenty of people who can pay but choose not to, I also know plenty of people that can't pay if they have to pay dollars. Not only because of our worthless currency but because there are restrictions to that kind of payments.

> "I steal but rich people steal much more!" 100% correct but where do we go from there? I think the answer is highly nation-specific. Assuming of course there's is even a real, functional nation in the first place and not everyone just caring for themselves.

The first part is fair. The second I don't really understand.

Anyway, my main point is that I may understand not all incentives to commit piracy may be strictly greedy, but that it doesn't mean "it's a crime without consequences" as many people portrays it. Salaries get paid from sales. That's how capitalism works and we live in a capitalist world. A sale that does not happen hurts the income of the authors, regardless of whether middlemen are involved. If the sale would be impossible and because of the nature of software and digital media it may be of no consequence, but in most cases the sale could have happened so it isn't. There's also the fact that often it is just lies we tell ourselves.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:09:04 +0000

> > Maybe because it does not take anything from anyone else?

> Except it's akin to rejecting to pay the salary to someone who provided a service to you.

If I don't pay the guy cleaning my gutters then it does very much take from him the time he would have used to clean someone else's and the money he would have been correctly paid.

> Note that I'm 100% in favor of piracy when either you don't want to help a particular individual

Laws that depend on whom you like: that's a very interesting legal and fairness concept.

> or you can't pay for the stuff and would thus make no difference to the author

This one is a bit more logical but I'm afraid the definition of "can't pay" is still very subjective. I lived with people who "could not" pay their $15 share of a monthly bill after partying most of the month or going to Starbucks every single morning (cause you know, the free company's coffee really sucks...) and I also know they were not that extraordinary at all, heard plenty of similar stories. Money is extremely subjective and I really, really doubt the hundreds of millions of people sharing a streaming password in the USA can actually not pay for their own subscription. Some yes, hundreds of millions, no. Inequalities are growing fast but I don't think hundreds of millions of people in the USA struggle to put food on the table, at least not yet. Hence DRM as a mitigation. DRM = better than not making any money at all.

I bet most of us have seen newspapers begging for a monthly subscription which is "only the price of a sandwich"

> as services and mainstream studios take the biggest cut, and that may also encourage piracy in the base of ideology.

"I steal but rich people steal much more!" 100% correct but where do we go from there? I think the answer is highly nation-specific. Assuming of course there's is even a real, functional nation in the first place and not everyone just caring for themselves.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mrugiero — Thu, 28 Apr 2022 18:04:43 +0000

> Welcome to the real world where the majority of people think that copying is not really stealing. Maybe because it does not take anything from anyone else?

Except it's akin to rejecting to pay the salary to someone who provided a service to you. Note that I'm 100% in favor of piracy when either you don't want to help a particular individual (I enjoy some rather controversial people's music, and I really really don't want to feed them) or you can't pay for the stuff and would thus make no difference to the author whether you consume their product or not, but otherwise it's opportunity cost. I wonder if that's also why people tend to never donate to open source projects, just because it's freely distributed doesn't mean making it was free :^)
Then again, I also understand that in the real world only buying directly from indie studios really makes any significant difference to the actual author, as services and mainstream studios take the biggest cut, and that may also encourage piracy in the base of ideology.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mrugiero — Thu, 28 Apr 2022 18:00:22 +0000

I don't have a lot to say about the DRM stuff. I more or less disagree with that model in the sense I think in all practicality it will be removed by pirates but will stop non-savvy users from sharing with friends, which I think (as long as it's only one level) is fair. Of course, whatever terms the author decides, the author is free. But:

> funny enough, digital sales seem to be lower than physical sales

Having streaming services available this actually doesn't have a real "funny" factor if you think of it. Except from some more conscious users that may not entirely trust streaming services to keep all titles up (it's happened before after all), the only people that may be interested in actually having a copy are proper fans, the kind that would value the boxing art the copy comes with. For example, I don't own a lot of shows, but I did buy the Lost box set back in the day, because it was damn beautiful and very elaborate. A digital copy would have been meh, even without streaming services piracy isn't really all that prosecuted in my country and, while nowadays I'm wary of pirating something I can pay for and I appreciate (I like to incentivize authors of stuff I like), at the time it seemed like a waste of money. I didn't have a lot of money back then either, a lot of savings went on that box set.
Most users would rather prefer the practicality of streaming.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

JanC_ — Wed, 27 Apr 2022 03:04:35 +0000

The DRM you can enable in Firefox is (or can be?) extremely CPU-intensive, and runs in 1 thread even if you are running multiple streams at the same time (which people like to do to e.g. follow some sports events that happen at the same time). Obviously whenever it tries to use more than 100% of that single CPU core things start to hang & stutter, a problem illegal non-DRM streams don’t suffer from—especially with hardware video decoding.

Many streaming services only allow it for lower resolutions also (requiring hardware DRM for better qualities).

Android-based and Linux-based e-ink devices

jnareb — Sat, 23 Apr 2022 00:16:03 +0000

There is a growing set of e-ink based notebooks with EMR stylus, that use either Android or Linux as its operating system - and do not require going to Aliexpress to buy. Examples include Onyx Boox devices (Android based), Ratta's Supernote devices (Android based)... there is planned PineNote device (Linux based).

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

bartoc — Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:20:46 +0000

KOReader can actually reflow PDFs, it doesn't always work though. It does tend to work for the output of the various LaTeX styles used for papers though, which is good.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

bartoc — Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:19:22 +0000

To be clear: I prefer these sorts of dual licensing situations to just keeping everything closed, but I probably wouldn't want to try and build a company on top of AGPL code that I didn't have the copyrights for.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:55:36 +0000

> Given a choice between paid versus pirate services, both safe and convenient, where do you think these people would go?

Too hastily posted sorry. What I meant is: given a choice between paid services and asking their non-technical and trusted friends to copy and reshare DRM-free files, which option do you think these millions of password-sharing people would choose? The goal of DRM is only to make that exact sort of informal, "between trusted friends" copies harder. It's not to stop professional pirates, people pushing DRM are not delusional. For professional pirates they ask the FBI to do the job, not DRM.

Welcome to the real world where the majority of people think that copying is not really stealing. Maybe because it does not take anything from anyone else?

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:17:00 +0000

I think it's both. About half subscribers illegally share their passwords according to most estimates (Netflix is planning to do something about it). Given a choice between paid versus pirate services, both safe and convenient, where do you think these people would go?

PS: a VPN is the usual "solution" for geo restrictions.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

anselm — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 13:23:03 +0000

If my program complies with section 13 by offering code to its users, but the network blocks that offer, I'm in compliance - you'd need the court to rule that the network is in scope to get the proxy trick barred, and that's a reach.

The intent behind the source-code download provision in the AGPL is obviously that actual end users of the service do indeed get the opportunity to download the corresponding source code. Resorting to technical subterfuge to make that deliberately impossible, in order to deprive end users of a privilege expressly included in the license by the original licensor of the code, probably won't fly. On the whole, courts don't like subterfuge.

One could even argue that it is your duty as the operator of the service to ensure that “the network” does not interfere unduly with what you are legally obliged to provide to the end users of your service. “Too bad, that naughty proxy is beyond my control” is unlikely to work as an excuse when it is in fact simpler to not have the proxy in the first place, and when there are countless hosting providers that will let you do exactly that.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

farnz — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 11:22:08 +0000

Like I said, I'm not your lawyer, and if you want legal advice, you should speak to a lawyer.

The normal rules of drafting legal documents have two things in play:

Where the document is ambiguous, resolve the ambiguity in favour of the party who did not choose the terms.
Unless something is explicitly brought into scope by the document, assume it is out of scope.

It's the combination of those two that results in the AGPL not working the way the FSF want it to. The first means that any conflict between section 2 and section 13 should be resolved in favour of the licensee, not the licensor, since the licensor could have chosen other terms if they didn't want the conflict - this is why Neo4j versus Purethink went against the FSF's intent with the AGPL, since the licensor did choose other terms, and Purethink can't rely on the FSF's interpretation alone.

The second means that the network is out of scope once you get beyond the program itself, because section 2 is clear that it doesn't impose restrictions on merely running the program, and no section of the AGPL brings the entirety of the network into the AGPL's scope. If my program complies with section 13 by offering code to its users, but the network blocks that offer, I'm in compliance - you'd need the court to rule that the network is in scope to get the proxy trick barred, and that's a reach.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

LtWorf — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:42:05 +0000

> Hector isn't just a random - he's a lead developer on Asahi Linux, reverse-engineering the Apple M1 SoC.

I have no idea to whom nicknames on HN map to.

Regardless, being a skilled developer doesn't make you always right, and is especially irrelevant when talking about topics outside of software development.

> court in Neo4j vs Purethink

Irrelevant, that was software under a double license.

> In both cases, to interpret the licence the way the FSF would like it interpreted falls foul of the normal rules of drafting contracts

Citation needed :)

> section 13 and section 2 are in conflict

I don't see it. And neither one of us is an expert in the topic, so I don't see why should your opinion count more.

> Since the court chose the interpretation of section 10

As I said, they were ruling on a double licensed software.

> if I act to use a separate proxy to remove the notice, section 13 does not come into play when running my proxy

Of course it does :)

Otherwise no proxy would be needed at all, since my client is probably crossing a number of routers to reach your server anyway. It doesn't matter how many steps it takes, it matters that it does reach it.

This proxy idea is foolish.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

farnz — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:03:11 +0000

Hector isn't just a random - he's a lead developer on Asahi Linux, reverse-engineering the Apple M1 SoC.

And his analysis is the same as I've had from a lawyer (noting that the following is not legal advice, just my notes from the discussion), whose view was that if the court in Neo4j vs Purethink chose to assert that section 7 did not apply in Purethink's use of Neo4j under AGPLv3, then the AGPLv3 is probably impossible to comply with in full, since the same intent-based analysis is needed to apply section 10 to the copyright holder's restrictions as is needed to make section 13 apply to someone who does not distribute a copy of the code they're running.

In both cases, to interpret the licence the way the FSF would like it interpreted falls foul of the normal rules of drafting contracts; section 13 and section 2 are in conflict, just as section 10 is in conflict with the added terms Neo4j used. Since the court chose the interpretation of section 10 that means that section 7 does not apply to conditions added by the copyright holder (which would be the normal rules of drafting coming into play - the copyright holder is not bound by the licence), the chances are high that a court will resolve the conflict between section 2 ("You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force") and section 13 ("your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source").

Specifically, if I act to use a separate proxy to remove the notice, section 13 does not come into play when running my proxy - the proxy is not a covered work. Section 2 means that I can run my modified version (which complies with section 13, so I've not breached the licence) freely, and grant the proxy access to it. How do you prevent me from running a separate system that removes a specific link that I have myself added (which means I am the copyright holder), without placing restrictions on my right to run the modified program, and without also putting the operation of (say) a TLS termination proxy into a legally grey area?

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

LtWorf — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 07:28:22 +0000

Yes I did follow the link to hacker news. It's some other person's unsubstantiated opinion with immediately someone telling them why it's wrong.

At the end of the day some random comment of a person with no legal training doesn't seem to me to be more reliable than the people at FSF who do this for a living.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

ceplm — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:21:25 +0000

Does CoolReader work on Kobo?

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

ceplm — Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:11:56 +0000

I think this is completely wrong. The thing which saved music industry was not DRM but wide availability of paid-for music services (either for download or streaming, it doesn’t matter so much, I think). When here in Czechia half of music on Amazon and almost all videos are not available to me, what else I can do then to turn to my friendly pirate? I would gladly pay for my Murdoch Mysteries addiction, but there is no way for me how to buy the latest episode legally here.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mpr22 — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 18:00:38 +0000

>My understanding of the Affero licenses is that a commercial company owning the source code and taking the "open core" approach would need to dual license the code to get away from the Affero GPL aspects. Otherwise, they will need to provide the full source of the running service component upon request.

I don't see how publishing part of Software You Completely Own under the Affero GPL has any legal relevance to what you do with the full version of Software You Completely Own running on Hardware You Own, except possibly by some probably-fragile argument based on estoppel doctrines.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

karim — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:24:02 +0000

Actually that's not entirely correct.

If you follow the thread, you'll eventually find that the author does link to a quite thorough analysis he had posted on HN on this topic:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30044019

That analysis is relatively well constructed from my point of view. He's definitely spent way much more time to look at this than I have, but ends up with the same conclusion.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

LtWorf — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:21:36 +0000

I don't think a random person's tweet in which no arguments are given is a particularly convincing argument to make me stop use AGPL.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

farnz — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:51:07 +0000

I find Hector Martin's analysis of the risk convincing, personally - it appears to be impossible to comply with the terms of the AGPLv3 as written if it's a community project, but not if you're the sole copyright holder.

Which leads to a messy situation where a company can comply (because they act as one entity doing the modification internally), but a community project cannot. It's even better for companies running a copyright assignment and open core stunts - as the copyright holder, they don't need a licence to distribute copies, so can ignore the terms completely, while the licence is sufficiently hard to comply with that if you do modify it and expose that modification to the world, I can use copyright infringement lawsuits to shut down your community project.

This is in contrast to GPLv3, where it's manageable to comply with the licence even as an individual. And I agree with Hector Martin's claim that it's a consequence of trying to close the SaaS loophole (which is what you're worrying about) while not ignoring Freedom 0.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

dsommers — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 07:40:08 +0000

> I also see it as being the foundation stone of a particularly noxious "open core" strategy for a player with deep pockets. Publish, under the AGPL, an "open core" to which you hold 100% of the copyrights, run a considerably extended proprietary build of the software as a paid network service, and do not accept community contributions to your core.

My understanding of the Affero licenses is that a commercial company owning the source code and taking the "open core" approach would need to dual license the code to get away from the Affero GPL aspects. Otherwise, they will need to provide the full source of the running service component upon request.

That said, this open sourced service component could probably access other non-open source components over a network socket, where the source code of the the latter part would not need to be revealed.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mpr22 — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:50:23 +0000

My mind may be naturally convoluted or something, but I see the AGPL as having some... odd assumptions about what interfaces network-facing programs (should be expected to) offer.

I also see it as being the foundation stone of a particularly noxious "open core" strategy for a player with deep pockets. Publish, under the AGPL, an "open core" to which you hold 100% of the copyrights, run a considerably extended proprietary build of the software as a paid network service, and do not accept community contributions to your core.

People whose needs are small enough that billing them is more hassle than it's worth can use your "core" offering for free, but your competitors can't build a proprietary platform on top of it because you've AGPL'd the core.

(I'm pretty sure I didn't come up with this idea independently, btw.)

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

dsommers — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 18:32:37 +0000

I generally prefer GPLv2, but can accept GPLv3. The Affero variants I find good too for anything delivering a network service, because it makes it harder for companies doing changes to the code and then (ab)using that to get revenues and not needing to provide back to the community.

If the Affero license scares companies from building a service on an open source project, that is actually a good thing for the project. The company (if playing by the laws and rules) need to provide the source code if anyone using their services requests it. If they refuse, they deserve no rights to use that code.

For most end-users, the Affero variant doesn't really make much of a difference at all. Not until you take that code, modify it and distribute it as a network service.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:53:59 +0000

Just in case that wasn't clear enough, what I meant is: DRM works to make some money in the _real world_ where half of the subscribers to streaming services share their password - and that's considering only the people who spend some money in the first place.

DRM is obviously a pure annoyance for all customers with absolutely zero value.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

amacater — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:11:59 +0000

Unless your PDFs are well marked up, they're fairly rubbish for a screen reader / some other accessibility concerns.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

mathstuf — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:01:52 +0000

However, it doesn't reflow. If you have an A4 PDF, you're going to be sad trying to read that on a Letter-sized reader (or vice versa). If your books are "just" text and an occasional image, I think reflow is important. If you have reams of diagrams, crazy typography (e.g., House of Leaves), or other considerations, yes, PDF is going to be the best representation.

However, I also only tend to read dead trees, so take that as you will.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

nmingott — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:38:39 +0000

Pdf is the only format in which i am willing to read a non paper book. Standard, markable, printable. The best.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

LtWorf — Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:50:00 +0000

> DRM works great

I mean… works great in stopping me from paying netflix, disney and whatever because I know it won't work on linux.

Yes firefox has the option to enable DRM. It never worked for me and I don't have the patience of spending days to figure it out when there are easier alternatives at hand.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

k3ninho — Mon, 18 Apr 2022 09:24:42 +0000

>streaming revenues have totally eclipsed sales

Are these baseline numbers for running a music business or are they remuneration to artists? Every time this comes up, I'm keen to point back to artists supposedly being able to live from the rewards of their creative work because of the monopoly protections of copyright. If we're taking about earning by non-musicians who broker and trade creative works, streaming and download/physical artefact sales are different contractual terms and different delivery mechanisms, making for an apple-orange comparison.

>Speaking of streaming here's an interesting proposition: "pay for who you play"
https://musically.com/2020/10/01/deezer-still-pushing-for...
>There are reports of bots listening to streaming services to boost one particular artist's revenue. This would fix that and much more.

I like this idea, thank you for sharing it. Especially when micropayments promise the ability to pay artists for their creations.

I'd love an Electronic Monk, to watch TV and listen to the music I don't have time to observe.

K3n.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

dvdeug — Mon, 18 Apr 2022 04:25:30 +0000

DRM saved the music industry? Amazon Music has been selling DRM-free (even watermark-free) MP3s since 2007. CDs are still available, DRM-free. Youtube-dl has been available for a decade. I'm skeptical that the limited availability of DRM-restricted music ever had a major effect on the music industry.

Streaming is DRMed? Copying from streams has always been clumsy enough and annoying enough, DRM or no, that the only people who do it are the "penniless" people, the people who taped from the radio. I've never thought to try to tape streaming audio, since there has always been easier ways to get a copy of the music, without even thinking about potential DRM on it.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 17:50:46 +0000

Apple added DRM back when they (finally) pivoted to streaming. Most if not all streaming services use DRM and streaming revenues have totally eclipsed sales. While many artists complain streaming revenues are still far from the pre-internet era, streaming revenues are now much more than what digital sales ever made (funny enough, digital sales seem to be lower than physical sales)
https://techcrunch.com/2020/09/10/recorded-music-revenue-...
https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ (very nice graphs)
Same trends in Europe https://www.impalamusic.org/stats-2/

Keep in mind these are revenues in the richest parts of the world.

It seems like Apple (nor anyone else) ever sold or rented DRM-free _movies_.

Of course there's a large choice of tools to strip FairPlay and other DRM. DRM is only intended as a major annoyance and incentive to pay for people rich enough to afford it. Clearly not everyone: https://www.google.com/search?q=streaming+password+sharing

It's obviously very hard to tell what would have happened in a "counterfactual" world with DRM-free streaming services but for sure DRM-ed streaming has saved the music industry; "it works".

Speaking of streaming here's an interesting proposition: "pay for who you play"
https://musically.com/2020/10/01/deezer-still-pushing-for...
There are reports of bots listening to streaming services to boost one particular artist's revenue. This would fix that and much more.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:44:28 +0000

Speaking of dinosaurs...

Measuring crime is difficult and measuring IP theft is much harder. That's why DRM discussions tend to be very "religious"... on BOTH sides: thanks for reminding us.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

marcH — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 14:43:11 +0000

While not as popular, illegal downloads still exists today. Napster was just the first and most famous example.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

gfernandes — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 08:25:26 +0000

This comment is so off, I don't really know what to say.

There is no world in which DRM was, is, or will ever be, good for anyone except dinosaurs trying to pretend the meteor hasn't landed.

KOReader: a free electronic-book reader for e-ink devices

karim — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 02:54:24 +0000

To be clear, I'm not saying that either of those readings applies to this specific software. I'm saying that that's how I view any Affero-licensed software.