Even more absurd is the story of ebook lending.
IIUC libraries fought for it in the consumers' interest with the result that you can sometimes now "take out" an ebook from a library or another reader, blocking their access to it until you "return" it.
Worse, publishers implemented "wearing out" of the copy after some number of uses!
[http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/e-book-library-lending-b...]
I tried to go paper-less last year but gave in when I noticed most books I wanted I can get on Amazon for like:
- $15 for a ebook (of limited use due to DRM)
- $10 printed in advance on dead trees and shipped to me
- $4 for a used paper copy (in near-perfect condition)
How is it possible that a new physical book is cheaper than the ebook!?! The only explanation is that DRM prevented the existance of a second-hand market letting prices sky-rocket.
The key point here is first-sale doctrine. Physical goods could always be resold, and the used books market kept book prices (both sale and rent) in check.
Ironically, until the internet peer-to-peer resale was impractical, so second-hand stores came in as "trackers" and libraries as both "trackers" and "seeds" :-)
Anyway, I see this as a counter-point to the replies claiming some customers want DRM because it allows renting which at lower prices than buying.
Without DRM, giving up a film you watched to save money wouldn't have to be a justifiable business model for publishers — it'd be an inevitable result of your ability to sell it.
("Selling your copy" also doesn't make any sense in a digital world. But it's no more absurd than the concept of "buying a copy" in the first place, and as long as copyright enables first sale we are better off with second sale freedom.)
I suppose video renting only exists because film studios had to compete with themselves selling physical media. (Scary realization: If Hollywood embraced exclusively digital delivery, they could be more evil!)
I tried to go paper-less last year but gave in when I noticed most books I wanted I can get on Amazon for like: - $15 for a ebook (of limited use due to DRM) - $10 printed in advance on dead trees and shipped to me - $4 for a used paper copy (in near-perfect condition)
How is it possible that a new physical book is cheaper than the ebook!?! The only explanation is that DRM prevented the existance of a second-hand market letting prices sky-rocket.
The key point here is first-sale doctrine. Physical goods could always be resold, and the used books market kept book prices (both sale and rent) in check. Ironically, until the internet peer-to-peer resale was impractical, so second-hand stores came in as "trackers" and libraries as both "trackers" and "seeds" :-)
Anyway, I see this as a counter-point to the replies claiming some customers want DRM because it allows renting which at lower prices than buying. Without DRM, giving up a film you watched to save money wouldn't have to be a justifiable business model for publishers — it'd be an inevitable result of your ability to sell it. ("Selling your copy" also doesn't make any sense in a digital world. But it's no more absurd than the concept of "buying a copy" in the first place, and as long as copyright enables first sale we are better off with second sale freedom.)
I suppose video renting only exists because film studios had to compete with themselves selling physical media. (Scary realization: If Hollywood embraced exclusively digital delivery, they could be more evil!)