Slashdot Mirror


Lulu Introduces DRM

An anonymous reader writes "Print-on-demand publisher Lulu recently announced that they're offering 'eBooks.' Since they've always offered downloadable books as PDFs, that takes some decoding to figure out what part is new: it turns out that it means now they're handling more formats, they've significantly increased the share they take out of the purchase price ... and for an additional fee, they now offer DRM. I have a few items published through Lulu myself; nothing forces me to buy the DRM, but I'm considering taking my business elsewhere on principle. This isn't what I expected from the people who, when I first signed up with them, were solidly endorsing Creative Commons."

49 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. Philosophy versus reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Amusing to see what happens when "information wants to be free" collides with "your bills are past due".

    1. Re:Philosophy versus reality by joaommp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lulu in it self is a whole bad business idea. Not really the business idea behind it, but the company. Why? Because they're dishonest. They sell books but they say they have no responsability in what happens to them during transport. Then, the book misteriously disappears during shipping, even before the end of timeframe they say it takes for them to ship it and appears on that same day for sale on Amazon at twice the price, by some strange company. Then, we contact them to ask for explanations and they say they have no responsability.

    2. Re:Philosophy versus reality by joaommp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The book I have in my signature is an example. Written by a friend, he kept a specific track of all the copies sold. The company didn't buy the book to resell. The company appeared on Amazon selling a book that wasn't bought. My friend was one copy short and the company that showed up on Amazon had a copy that appeared to come out of nowhere.

    3. Re:Philosophy versus reality by g2devi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, "Information wants to be free" is from an essay and it's only half the idea.
      The basic concept is:
      * Information wants to be free, because it's hard to keep a secret (or as the old saying goes, two can keep a secret if one is dead)
      * Information wants to be expressive because knowledge is power
      * The next century will be a struggle between these two forces.

      This is still true and will likely always be true.

      This struggle appears within all people. Even the strongest proponent of "information wants to be free" would balk if his/her privacy is violated, his/her identity is stolen, the paparazzi take intimate pictures from his/her closes family, and all his knowledge and his abilities are reproduced by Country X whose residents are so poor that they are willing to work 20 hour days for a bowl of gruel made with tainted water.

    4. Re:Philosophy versus reality by mysidia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see Lulu as in a very precarious position here. It's likely just as much a result of new competition in the market, and not just Lulu needing more money to pay the bills.

      The self-publishing market is very small. Lulu cannot afford to give up business to competitors, as there may very well be not enough of it to go around.

      Lulu sells or used to sell things via retailers Amazon.

      However: recently, Amazon is now in direct competition with Lulu through Amazon Publishing Services and CreateSpace.

      The new competition from Amazon and others has the potential to cut off Lulu's air supply.

      In addition, Amazon has the Kindle, and their own proprietary file format, soon Barnes and Noble will too. They can publish eBooks for authors, and the authors then don't need Lulu.

      With Amazon's services, authors can even get their books printed, in addition to making eBooks, so it is likely the authors simply take all their business to Amazon, which means, they no longer have a need to buy anything from Lulu.

      If Lulu doesn't get new books, they don't get to take a cut from sales of new books, and then they die.

      For many authors: DRM is considered essential or mandatory for eBook publication. Or at least, considered an advantage, extra protection for the author's work.

      So.. any publication / distribution channel that doesn't offer an option to utilize DRM technologies could be seen to be at a substantial competitive disadvantage, while they are simply handing customers over to the likes of Amazon, who do offer DRM.

    5. Re:Philosophy versus reality by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just because a book appears for sale on Amazon, doesn't mean a physical copy exists. For all anyone knows, someone automated system has scraped titles off Lulu and is selling them through Amazon for a markup. A person orders the book from Amazon, office_bookshelf trots on over to Lulu and orders a copy and has mailed it straight to the customer. At no time has an additional physical copy of the book even existed.

  2. Why complain about choice? by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As you say, you don't have to use the DRM at all. I don't see any benefit in punishing anyone that simply supports that as an option for authors that don't know any better (or think they do). If people want the rope for whatever reason, just shake your head and let them buy it.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Why complain about choice? by Machtyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Free market in this case. The company is trying to appeal to the largest number of people at a time. If they can support Creative Commons *and* DRM users... then good for them. I'd suspect that the raising of Lulu's take would be more upsetting. (Again free market will bear out if that was a smart move or not.)

    2. Re:Why complain about choice? by KTheorem · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Already there are a lot of comments like this in the general form of "just because company A, whom you do business with, starts to do something B that you find objectionable doesn't mean you should inconvenience yourself, especially if B doesn't directly affect your business dealing with them." It quite frankly baffles me.

      What if the objectionable thing B was using slave labor for a product you do not use or buy? Does it suddenly become okay to continue the business relationship? I know there are huge differences in the offense, but the underlying argument is the same for both buying from a DRM encumbered goods provider and a slave created goods provider: "I don't directly deal in those products, so I will continue to buy other products from them and let the ones who DO buy them deal with the consequences."

      Obviously—I hope—refusing to buying from a company with some products manufactured by slaves, even if the products you would be interested in aren't, would be a reasonable action. It is therefor clear that what people using the argument really mean is that they don't care about DRM enough to stop purchasing on priciple and don't thing you should either, and not that they actually think their argument really applies. In which case, they should really stop making the "boycotting is hard so don't do it" argument.

    3. Re:Why complain about choice? by nametaken · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I actually kinda like that Lulu is offering it. I don't expect it, but I hope that the sales numbers illustrate authors getting a solid f'ing black eye by opting for DRM. Then perhaps it could serve as a lesson to them... hate on your customers and they'll hate on you right back.

    4. Re:Why complain about choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And yet you buy from adidas, Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, DaimlerChrysler, Nestlé, Procter&Gamble and Siemens although they profit from torture, slavery, illegal medication trials on humans, political and social discrimination, destruction of resources and the environment.
      And you do not actually want to hear that.

      Source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzbuch_Markenfirmen (where is the English equivalent? Don't they criticize globalization where it is due?)

    5. Re:Why complain about choice? by kklein · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am very tired of people trying to write rules for life. There is no algorithm; there are no unassailable truths. Being totally consistent in all things does not actually make any sense, because there is no one right answer to be applied to all cases.

      We like to think that a totally logically consistent pattern of behavior will yield better results, but it won't, for two basic reasons:

      1) This idea is inherited from religious/magical thought and is, as far as I am concerned anyway, a crock of horseshit already, because it doesn't scale. You end up with fundamentalist Muslims killing people with rocks over petty shit, or evangelicals who believe that Jesus erases all their sins and that, therefore, even the most offensive crimes against humanity can be fixed with prayer and Kleenex.

      2) This is actually part of the first reason, but these patterns don't exist in any objective way. They are applied after the fact by humans as shorthand. Religions made up simple rules to get people's minds off the big things so they could improve everyday life, and the cracks only start to really show when life is so good that we can take another look at those rules. Math doesn't exist. Numbers don't exist. Grammar doesn't exist (don't tell Chomsky). Ideas and meaning don't exist. They are all just tools to make our monkey lives better. We can't be frustrated when people's behavior is not logically consistent. It really shouldn't be.

      So yes, you're right, it is logically inconsistent to call for the boycott of a company that uses slave labor, but not one which violates your geek religion's creed against DRM. But most people are smart enough to see that those things aren't even slightly similar, and only a crazy person would apply the same logic to both.

      That being said, if you are living in the developed world (and if you're reading this, you probably are), guess what? Virtually every product you enjoy has slave labor tucked away in it somewhere. You can't live high on the hog without slavery. We've just gotten very good at hiding it so we can feel superior. There's always a slave. Always.

      And that doesn't bother me. I don't like it, but I don't think it can be avoided, and to try to do so would make my life incredibly inconvenient.

      Maybe there's logical consistency after all.

    6. Re:Why complain about choice? by TheMCP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you SERIOUSLY trying to equate DRM to slavery? Have you COMPLETELY lost your mind?

    7. Re:Why complain about choice? by KTheorem · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No. I was not. Since you are the third person to have misinterpreted what I was saying, I must conclude it is my fault.

      I was trying to point out that the reasoning behind opposing boycotts based on a company's support of DRM was flawed, by applying it to something damn near everybody is opposed to vehemently.

      I don't think they are in any sane way comparable. I was using that fact to show that what the people who opposed boycotting because of DRM really meant was "this doesn't bother me enough to boycott and inconvenience myself" and not "you shouldn't boycott if it inconveniences you" as was implied by the wordings of many of the posters who thought that boycotting because of DRM was silly.

      I really don't give a damn if anyone boycotts Lulu for any reason. My only goal was to point out the flawed reasoning being used.

    8. Re:Why complain about choice? by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In this case, the free market should do fine.

      The free market only has problems when:
      1) People are allowed to do unethical things
      2) Monopolies or oligopolies are created
      3) There's a moral hazard

      None of these conditions exist here. The difference is a product with DRM vs. a product without it. It's like the difference between cereal with new, poor tasting marshmallows or without them. No one is being forced into anything, there's no monopoly, etc.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    9. Re:Why complain about choice? by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Saying that consistent behavior isn't a good thing because people go to war in the name of religion doesn't make sense. I have yet to see anything in any religion that says "Thou shalt kill everyone that doesn't believe the same things as you". All these religious wars are done by people acting AGAINST critical portions of their own religion. "Thou shalt not kill" is pretty universal and yet people are killing each other in the name of religion. That's not consistent behavior.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    10. Re:Why complain about choice? by Angostura · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ooo good. I love bad analogies. They're fun. Can I have a go too?

      What if the objectionable thing B was manufacturing blue M&Ms, a colour you dislike - even if you don't purchase M&Ms. Does it suddenly become okay to continue the business relationship? I know there are huge differences in the offense, but the underlying argument is the same for both buying from someone who makes confectionary in an objectionable colour and a slave created goods provider.

      Are you really surprised that people care more about enforced slave labour than a company that allows two people to enter into a contract which sets out on what devices they are able to buy a licensed product?

    11. Re:Why complain about choice? by Evanisincontrol · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have yet to see anything in any religion that says "Thou shalt kill everyone that doesn't believe the same things as you".

      There may not be a commandment that reflects those ideals, but it's sure as hell implied very frequently in the Christian bible. Moses was commanded by God to, with his army of Levi priests, slaughter 3000 Israelites who had started worshiping a golden cow at the bottom of Mount Sinai. (Exodus 32). Sounds like God-directed ethnic cleansing to me.

      Later, Moses takes his army and goes to war against the Midianites. After his soldiers report that they've killed every man in the city but spared the women and children, Moses commands them to go back and slaughter all the child and non-virgin women, but to keep the virgin women for themselves, effectively to use a fuck toys. (Numbers 31)

      There's dozens of other examples of God's "righteous wrath" being used as the sole reasons to slaughter thousands of people and destroy any religious artifact that doesn't make God happy. (Hell, even when people are TRYING to make God happy but don't do it quite the right way, he tortures and/or kills them)

    12. Re:Why complain about choice? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You mean using DRM is not unethical? gee...

      Not neccessarily.

      Lets look at what it stands for: Digital Rights Management. It it is attempt to digitaly enforce the rights you buy when you enter into a contract. Whenever you buy a copyrighted work you are usually buying a single user licence to that work, sometimes it is transferable to another person, sometimes not.

      Personally I have no problem with a licence being non-transferable if that is made clear to me at the start. If I have willingly accepted a non-transferable licence I have no issue with DRM being used to enforce that.

      DRM does become annoying though when you extend it to try and enforce other things under the guise of stopping piracy. It is frequently used to restrict me to a single device (or a limited number of devices). I have at least 3 PC's (Office, Home, Second Home), a smart phone and a laptop: I want to be able to pick which of these is right for me to use at anyone time.

      The biggest problem with DRM is that the really hard technogical problems like how I can buy a single user licence but still use it on a multitude of devices seems to have been ignored. Instead most implementations have tried to force me to buy the same copyrighted works several times for different platforms, sometimes I have caved in and done so for simplicities sake, but whenever I do I harbour a little more resentment for the company that forces me to do this, that does not make me a satisfied customer in the long run.

      So the real point of my post, is that DRM could be great if it actually was used to impart some rights I am entitled to by contract in my direction as well as enforcing the purveyor of the copyrighted works rights. Currently though all the systems are designed to appeal to the copyright holder so maybe a open source DRM system designed to run on any platform would not be such a bad thing. A system designed as a cooperative effort between the copyright holders and the end user would hopefully be more balanced.

      Please note that I have tried to keep this post away from mentioning any particular medium or format for a reason. We have now reached a technological stage where books, music and film can all be converted to data and shared around the globe. However we still live in a capitalist society where people require money in order to survive so there has to be a method of rewarding the creator of a work financially for the time they expended on producing said work.

      Disclaimer - I am a rampant socialist who thinks a long term solution is changing society to move away from its current capitalist nature, but I acknowledge that will not happen overnight so until it does I have no problem with earning money, which I do.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    13. Re:Why complain about choice? by russotto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't generally. It's actually really fucking annoying how many evil companies there are and how little punishment our society gives them. I'm always amazed that non-smokers are willing to buy items from cigarette companies.

      Eh? If they want to supply suicide sticks to others, that's fine with me.

      Or the number of people who bring that chocolate bar up to the cash register after I say "You should get Fair Trade chocolate instead since that one is made with slave labor.

      Maybe they just don't believe you. Me, I figure they're both made with slave labor, and the Fair Trade schtick is just a way to get suckers to pay the slavemasters more, but I'm a wee bit cynical.

  3. Non issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So... a publishing company is giving authors the *Option* of using DRM? I'm sorry, but I don't see a problem with that. If the Authors are silly enough to want that, then it's in Lulu's best interest to offer their clients what they want.

    1. Re:Non issue by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Especially as the DRM version costs more. If I published any books via Lulu I would make both the DRM-free and DRM-encumbered versions available and charge a few dollars more for the one with DRM.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  4. This has nothing to DRM, everything to do with $$$ by Afforess · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This move has nothing to do with DRM. Lulu figures that by adding a new option for authors that says it will "protect" their book from theft online, for a "small fee" that they will get an increase in profit, for no real added cost to themselves. In reality, if you are publishing through Lulu, I think DRM and book theft is the last thing you need to worry about.

    If you want to know why someone does something, follow the money.

    --
    If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
  5. Just to start us off with a car analogy... by TaggartAleslayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's like threatening to not let a dealership sell your line of cars because they offer LoJack as an option on other models.

    DRM is not the devil. It is a tool. The sooner we stop crying about buzz words and instead actually do something about how they are used, the better off we will all be.

    1. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by Iceykitsune · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. DRM has the potential to give companies/governments absolute control over what you see and hear.

      --
      GENERATION 24: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
    2. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by syousef · · Score: 4, Informative

      DRM is not the devil. It is a tool.

      Yes, it's a tool to shut people out of using what they bought. Supposedly it prevents criminal copyright infringement but there is always collateral damage on legitimate use. That damage doesn't stop with the current owner either. In the future there will be entire groups of historians specialising in breaking ancient copyright to get an incite on our culture.

      The sooner we stop crying about buzz words

      DRM isn't a buzzword. It describes an intent to restrict the use of a resource. If you ask me we're not crying loud enough. The boiling frog analogy may not be scientifically correct but it's as good an analogy as any.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    3. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by jim_v2000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      DRM is nothing more than an attempt make digital media more like physical media. For example, you can't easily copy a book to give to a friend. You can, however, easily give a copy of an ebook to a friend. DRM makes it so you cannot easily give a copy of an ebook to a friend. DRM, when done right, is fine with me. But we rarely seen it done right, and honestly, I'm not entirely sure what it would look like.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    4. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Speaking of bad car analogies

      No, not LoJack, it's more like you're buying a 2005 SUV especially because you know it has an OnStar system on board, and then a few months later, GM decides to change the format on you, and you basically have no recourse (and no one willing to buy that truck from you, because by now everybody knows about the discontinuation).

      First generation Zune owners and Walmart DRM music customers should know basically what I'm talking about. You don't own the music you buy, and if you want to keep on listening to DRM music you've already purchased -- it means you may have to repurchase your same music again and again.

    5. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by shentino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not always.

      Especially if your non-refundable purchase of DRMed material gets nuked because the company doesn't feel like holding up their end of the bargain.

      You can't really "shop around" much if you've already been milked and burned.

      Doubly so if they have a big enough army of lawyers to squash you like a bug if you try to complain.

    6. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by dstar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Opposing DRM is not some kind of religion, it is not even a moral position,

      Opposing DRM is most definitely a moral position, on any number of grounds, starting with the ones you don't want to acknowledge down to the less obvious ones, such as opposing anything that makes life more difficult without providing any benefit or opposing the conflation of 'buy' with 'rent', as you never actually buy anything with DRM, you simply rent it.

      Feel free to pretend you aren't doing anything wrong when you say there's nothing wrong with DRM. Just be aware that that's exactly what you're doing -- pretending.

    7. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Funny

      DRM is not the devil. It is a tool.

      DRM is the Devil's tool.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    8. Re:Just to start us off with a car analogy... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dude, try a substitution - "the police" are a tool to punish innocent people who annoyed those in power. Supposedly they prevent crime as well but there's always collateral damage on legitimate behavior.

      DRM is only necessary because piracy is so widespread that it's impossible for humans to police it. If piracy was as rare as murder, then it'd be possible to have humans investigate every case and make a nuanced decision on whether it was legitimate and beneficial or criminal. This is an extremely sad state of affairs, but it's the reality in which we live.

  6. Making customers pay for DRM? by Andorin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Applying DRM (optional, eBooks only) adds $.99 to the base price to offset the fee charged by our DRM provider. To reiterate, authors never pay to publish, these fees are reflected in the list price and are only charged to the purchaser at purchase time.

    Note to self: Never use Lulu.

    --
    That Anonymous Coward guy is pretty annoying. Can we have the government censor him or something?
    1. Re:Making customers pay for DRM? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's wrong with charging extra for DRM? DRM costs money to create and passing that cost on to consumers directly seems like a very good way of highlighting exactly what is wrong with DRM. Get the book in DRM-encumbered form for $11 or DRM-free form for $10. Highlight the fact that the cost of the DRM is hidden in the purchase price when you buy something like a BluRay disk.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Making customers pay for DRM? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless, of course, the DRM restricted version is the only one that is available. Then you do not see a price difference for difference versions of the book, you see a price difference for different books -- pretty standard -- and do not feel the hurt of the restrictions until after the sale.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
  7. Does add cost though by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    for no real added cost to themselves

    Actually for Lulu the costs are very real and add up quickly:

    1) Assume they need a DRM server, that must have 99.9% availability.
    2) Need to test DRM to ensure it actually works
    3) Need support staff to deal with authors and developers not understanding why they cannot access content.

    I'm assuming they put a lot of thought into this, there must be a pretty compelling business case or else they would not incur this burden.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Does add cost though by a302b · · Score: 2, Informative

      To be perfectly honest, why use LuLu in the first place? There are plenty of cheaper "Print on Demand" (POD) publishers, including Amazon's Booksurge, which lists books on Amazon. I can't see why authors would accept traditional publisher & distributor markups (typically >40% of the retail price) and then add a retailer markup, all for the privilege of selling a book electronically or via POD on LuLu! Find a cheaper POD publisher and sell it yourself, or if a sales page and distributor access are vital, then use Booksurge or an equivalent, not Lulu.

      --
      Unity in Diversity
    2. Re:Does add cost though by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is there a DRM that DOES WORK? I've found that anything a person could ever want is available on the web, already stripped of any restrictive code. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough. Maybe there are some schemes that really work. But, it has often times been pointed out that DRM only frustrates legal users.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:Does add cost though by Stormwatch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is there a DRM that DOES WORK?

      From the user's point of view, that is a contradiction. The very purpose of DRM is to make things cease to be fully functional.

    4. Re:Does add cost though by Oligonicella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, please. Booksurge (CreateSpace) and Lulu do the same thing. They charge a publishing fee (base + page count), and add after that. Perhaps you could give a side by side comparison instead of a rant?

  8. Much ado about nothing by tsa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As has been said many times in this thread already, you don't HAVE to use DRM. I guess there are a lot of people who publish on Lulu who don't want a free-to-spread PDF of their work roaming around the world, diminishing the profits from their hard work. Now they have an extra option to offer people their work and get paid for it. Most people don't care about DRM at all, so what is the problem?

    --

    -- Cheers!

  9. Re:This has nothing to DRM, everything to do with by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe they would like to say: "Look, you can put DRM on your books to try to protect your copies, you don't need to go elsewhere. But be aware that that make some legitimate users unhappy -- as it did with music -- and they will opt to non-DRM ... making you lose money."
    If they wouldn't offer the option, they wouldn't be able to let publishers try out.

    OTOH, I have no clue about ebook publishing ;-)

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  10. Yes, Kindle DRM by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is there a DRM that DOES WORK?

    The Kindle DRM works about as well as any can (for eBooks).

    By that I mean, from the users point of view it doesn't get in the way, and from the authors point of view it's hard enough to strip that it appears to offer some protection.

    Also from the policy side, Kindle books are actually very user friendly - if you purchased a book but decide you want to "return" it, you can. Yes there was that whole mess with 1984, but even there at least the people got refunds. Personally I am still very reluctant to buy any book with DRM whereas I have and will buy PDF's without much of a qualm. I still mentally consider any DRM purchase merely a rental, no matter how long the digital version might be owned by me I live knowing it could go away any time for a variety of technical reasons.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  11. User friendly by Mathinker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Kindle books are actually very user friendly

    • So if I buy one, but have two or more Kindles, I can read it on all of them?
    • After I'm finished reading, I can indefinitely lend a Kindle book to a friend of mine in Brazil who also owns a Kindle by sending him something over the net?
    • After I'm finished reading, I can sell my Kindle book back to a used Kindle bookstore?
    • I can print out a chapter of a Kindle book to take to read at the beach?

    I doubt this (well, maybe the first one is doable, I don't have any Kindles, myself).

    All of this functionality might be expected by a reasonable consumer who isn't already thinking about why the publisher wouldn't want him to be able to do it.

    Thanks to Cory Doctorow from whom most of these examples/ideas have been lifted.

    1. Re:User friendly by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Informative

      So if I buy one, but have two or more Kindles, I can read it on all of them?

      Yes, you can. You just have to log out of one kindle and log in on another, and you have access to your entire library of purchased kindle books and documents on your personal server space.

      Ah, so after I buy two (different) ebooks, I can read one on my Kindle and at the same time my wife can read the second one on her Kindle?

      Similiarly, you can indefinately lend a kindle book to a friend in Brazil, but only in the same example (log out on kindle 1, log in on kindle 2). Just like a dead tree book, if your friend in Brazil is reading it at the time, you can't.

      The impression you give of the user experience is that while my friend reads this book in Brazil, I have no access to any of the other books I've bought under that login. That doesn't sound "just like a dead tree book". Am I missing something? Oh, and BTW, are you sure that the terms of use of the Kindle actually allow me to give my login details to my friend in Brazil? I'd double check that.

      No, you can't sell a kindle book to a used kindle bookstore. Obviously not, there is no difference between a new or used kindle book.

      There is no practical difference between a diamond when I buy it and when I resell it, yet I can still resell it on a free market. In fact, in most cases there is no discernible difference between a new (dead tree) book and a book which my brother has read (he's really OCD about his books). Maybe you should find a better justification?

      While you can't print out a chapter of a kindle book to take to read at the beach, you can do order of magnitude better. You can take your kindle to the beach,

      I have the feeling that at least some owners of Kindles don't use them while in the tub, in saunas, and perhaps they even might think twice about taking them to the beach. Of course, in the long run, the reader hardware will probably become really inexpensive, perhaps as inexpensive as a paper book. But that isn't the case now. Kindle users who don't take their Kindles to the beach might miss having the opportunity to print a part of their ebook so they could read it there. The fact that you, personally, are willing to use your Kindle in every situation where a paper book could be used does not convince me that everyone is like you.

      and read any book ever. ...

      I am sure there are lots of advantages of ebooks, even the DRMed Kindle ones. I also like (non DRMed) ebooks. My post wasn't about their advantages. If your point is that the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages for all reasonable people, you should say that. Because of your intense projection of user satisfaction on the general public, I'm sure you're very happy about being a Kindle owner, and I'm happy for you. You should be aware, however, that your personal satisfaction is not a good argument for this being the case in general.

  12. CC isn't for everybody. by Michael_gr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm with the people who don't think DRM is necessarily evil. Remember: Lulu is a *print-on-demand* outfit. You want a non-DRM'd version of a book? buy the print version and do whatever you want with it. I don't see why we should force writers to give their work in a format that can be duplicated too easily. If you write technical manuals, software guides, that sort of thing... you're in a market where piracy is very, very strong, to the point you may never make any money on your book, while it may be pirated by thousands or tens of thousands of users. Just look a the book section on Pirate Bay. Yes, I would have preferred if there was some global DRM scheme which was vendor-agnostic and internationally maintained by some non-affiliated organization, so we'd have some assurances our DRM'd media isn't going to just go away one day. But all the arguments I hear against DRM are about the specific implementation, not the idea in general. The idea is... well... necessary if you want people to bother writing professionally.

  13. Why I'm dropping endorsement/etc of Lulu by Russell+McOrmond · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Read some of the comments. There appears to be a lack of support for a boycott. Some because they don't consider DRM to be a problem or believe that it should be the authors choice, and some because they don't support the concept of consumer boycotts at all.

    Here is why I'm likely to boycott Lulu, and recommend against them whenever asked. I've already cleaned up my storefront to only indicate this removal of support.

    First I offer http://www.flora.ca/own for what I consider DRM to be, given there isn't a universal meaning for this acronym. It is also an explanation for less technical people about how DRM works, rather than the unscientific "magic" that some people believe it to be.

    I believe that authors imposing technology brands on audiences (DRM on content) is even less legitimate/moral than audiences imposing prices on authors (IE: copyright infringement). I don't condone either, but consider DRM to be worse.

    I consider the activity of locking technology such that the owner does not have the key (DRM on hardware/software) to be a direct attack on property rights. I consider this a form of "theft" that should be made clearly illegal -- not encouraged (through locks on content), legalised or legally protected.

    In the case of Lulu the blog article was clearly encouraging authors to put DRM on their content, making false (but common) claims that DRM would reduce infringement. DRM on content then imposes/encourages specific brands of technology, specifically technology that is locked down against the interests of their owners.

    Lulu is and should also be held to a higher standard. This is a company founded by Bob Young who knows better when it comes to the harms of DRM. If this were an old-economy publisher adding DRM-free digital distribution to an existing DRM-only system, this would be seen as a step in a positive direction. In this case this is a theoretically new-economy publisher adding and promoting DRM in addition to a long-standing DRM-free system, clearly a step in a negative direction.

  14. Re:Socialism does the same things. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Exactly. That's why when all those investment banks gambled massively, and lost, the whole nation shrugged it's shoulders and life went on.

    Well, the socialists deliberately derailed the economy so that they can get elected, and it worked. Kudos to you for a job well done!

    Let's map it out. You will bring down the free market economy. We will bring down the government, to even the score, and the anarchists will win.

    --
    This is my sig.
  15. still very friendly toward free information by bcrowell · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been using lulu for several years now. As with most long-term relationships, there are some things I like and others that drive me crazy. In general, however, their positive attitude toward free information is one of the big pluses. They were founded by a former Red Hat guy. They have always offered CC licenses as an explicit option in the menus when you set up your book in their web interface. Also, if you set your own royalty to zero, they do not take their usual cut. (This is what I do, because I'm a college professor, and I feel that taking a royalty raises uncomfortable conflict of interest issues, since I'm using my books in my own classes.) After reading TFA, I updated one of my books to see what the deal was. I have always had my books set so that people can buy printed copies (with zero royalty to me) or just download them for free in PDF format. When I updated my book I got a page like this:

    Download
    Makes your content available as a download
    Sell My Download
    Base Price $ 1.49

    The base price covers file hosting, bandwidth, and credit card transaction costs.

    *

    My Revenue $
    Please enter a number between 0.00 and 999999.99
    Lulu $ 0.00

    Lulu's commission (20% of the total profit)
    Learn more about the Lulu commission

    *

    Price $
    Please enter a number between 0.00 and 999999.99
    Give My Download Away For Free
    To account for hosting and transaction costs, we had to add a base price of $1.49 if you collect a creator revenue. However, if you want to give your download away for free, Lulu will waive this base price.

    If you look way down at the bottom under "Give My Download Away For Free," you'll see that they are not going to charge money unless I do. Here is the book, as updated today. You can still download it without paying any money.

    I do feel that DRM is evil. I'm not happy that lulu is supporting it. However, their over-all support for free information seems to me to be a lot better than you'd expect from Random Corporation, Inc.

    For the record, here are the things I like and dislike about lulu:

    Likes: They are the only POD or vanity publisher I know of that will let you set up and sell your book with zero initial cost. They handle all of the shipping and order processing, which was a huge hassle for me when I was doing it myself. They are relatively friendly toward free information.

    Dislikes: They have a business model sort of similar to Paypal, i.e., it is absolutely impossible to get a Lulu employee to talk to you on the phone, and very difficult to communicate with one in any other way, either. I have had repeated technical issues with them before, where the printer they subcontracted out to couldn't output a book that had outputted successfully for a long time before with other subcontractors; lulu wasn't willing/able to help me figure out a workaround, although I eventually figured it out myself. College bookstores have reported problems to me where lulu sent them bogus bills ($700 for books that FedEx tracking showed were shipped to someone's house in a different state), and made it an incredible hassle to straighten out the problem.