Slashdot Mirror
HarperCollins Wants Library EBooks to Self-Destruct After 26 Loans
An anonymous reader writes: "HarperCollins has decided to change their agreement with e-book distributor OverDrive [and other distributors, too]. They forced OverDrive, which is a main e-book distributor for libraries, to agree to terms so that HarperCollins e-books will only be licensed for checkout 26 times. Librarians have blown up over this, calling for a boycott of HarperCollins, breaking the DRM on e-books -- basically doing anything to let HarperCollins and other publishers know they consider this abuse."
Cory Doctorow, who wrote TFA, says: "For the record, all of my HarperCollins ebooks are also available as DRM-free Creative Commons downloads. And as bad as HarperCollins' terms are, they're still better than Macmillan's, my US/Canadian publisher, who don't allow any library circulation of their ebook titles."
Harper Collins also wants libraries to self-destruct after being used 26 times.
Not only does God definitely play dice, but He sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen. -Hawking
I agree to their terms but I will be using loan money. It ceases to function after 28 days and gets returned to me.
No deal?? ok I'll just pirate them. You lose.
It's okay, I've found gigpedia & usenet have simpler checkout procedures.
It's asinine that library ebooks should self destruct. If they want to negotiate a minimum loan duration to force the library to buy more of popular books, like maybe 1 day per 100 pages, well fine, but checkout counts run contrary to the whole idea of libraries.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
I've been reading ebooks on my mobile devices for at least six years. It's hardly an "untested fad".
Caveat Utilitor
"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further. "
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Fad? I take it you haven't actually tried an ebook, but they're pretty amazing. Pretty much the only aspect that's worse than the dead tree editions is that you need electricity to use them. There's more to innovate there like improving the interface and the screens, but it's a lot more convenient for me than books are.
Plus, I'm the sort of person that likes to keep books once I've bought them, and I just don't have much room available for books I might not read for several years.
From http://yuhongbao.blogspot.com/2010/06/artificial-scarcity-drm.html :
"Fair use rights
DRM is often used unintentionally or intentionally to take away fair use rights and sometimes sell them back, assisted by anti-circumvention provisions in laws like the DMCA that applies regardless of things like fair use rights."
In this case it is of course first sale, but the point is still the same.
They work when the power goes out
They work when the vendor changes formats for newer releases
They work when civilization collapses and they're found centuries later in a cave
And the don't magically turn into pumpkins when the clock strikes twelve.
There is of course, a way to make a normal book stop working when the availability of its content becomes a problem. It's called fire. It's generally bad form to burn a paper book. Why exactly is it socially acceptable to DRM a book again?
This is just another attack from the corporate powers against what is known as "The Commons". They won't be happy until they've destroyed any social institution that doesn't function to create profits for corporations. From prisons to libraries, there have been institutions in our society that we hold "in common". Public libraries, public schools, public safety (police and fire departments) even parks are all facing coordinated assaults on their very existence as public institutions. Corporations hate these things because people make use of them without enriching the economic elite. Hell, they don't even believe you should be able to lend something you bought to a neighbor or friend.
It can only happen if we go along with it.
What Harper Collins wants to do, what the RIAA and MPAA want to do, make a great case for civil disobedience, which in this case might take the form of "piracy" (an inaccurate label). Why would you want to buy a book from someone who holds you in such contempt?
And it is definitely possible to support the artists without supporting the corporations. It just takes a little more thought and effort.
You are welcome on my lawn.
They better not block screen readers and the blind should sue.
1) Print
2) Scan
3) OCR
4) PDF
5) Lend at will, as many times as you please.
Although it isn't legal, in this case I think it could and should be regarded as simple civil disobedience. Prohibition was brought down largely by people's flagrant disregard for it. If enough people thumb their noses at this foolishness, then perhaps we can all stop fighting about obsolete business models and get on with taking full advantage of the things our shiny new technology offers us.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
The great problem that libraries have is that most of them aren't used by the people that support them. As local governments are increasingly finding, you can shut a library and other than some well written letters to the editor, most taxpayers will go along with it. Public libraries have been around for 150 years and were far more important in ages where books were a lot less accessible. Spin forward to today and the use of public libraries has been declining. Part of this is the Internet. A lot of the information you once would have once gone to the library for you can search the internet for on your mobile phone. Schools have libraries that complement their curriculum, and Universities tend to be the place where you go if you are looking for more obscure books. My high school library was superior to the civic library when it came to research for papers back then. If I couldn't find stuff in my high school library, I had to go to the University library, because civic libraries didn't carry those sorts of books.
Although it is nice to believe that the community is charitable enough to want to spend money on putting books into the hands of people that can't afford them, a lot of people aren't willing to fund public health for poorer people. If you aren't willing to fund doctors for poor kids, you probably don't give a rats about making sure they have access to books. What is comes down to is that as much as a certain segment of the community likes the IDEA of libraries, the majority of the community doesn't give a rats arse because they never use them. That makes them an easy cut when local municipalities are trying to right the balance sheets.
People would rather less services than more tax and that puts libraries, increasingly less utilized, squarely into the "this is a luxury" column.
They don't work in the dark.
They cost a forest and a polluted river.
They require huge structures to house them, constant vigilance to watch for mold and deterioration, mice and fire.
Caves are not where you find books.
They bring jack booted thugs to demand their surrender for burning.
Books have to be carried around, you can never carry very many of them. Moving house is a bitch.
Shipping them is expensive. Printing them is expensive. This leads to a artificial scarcity of ideas and knowledge.
Books out of print may never come back into print. If you didn't buy it then, it may not be possible ever again.
Long after the copyright has expired, the Physical DRM encumbering books still hinders their distribution and replication.
ok, I'll get off your lawn now.....
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
We move around, a LOT. About 3 years ago, my poor husband begged me to consider an e-reader to save his back. I agreed, and I LOVE it.
I think it's great that I can carry a whole library of books in my purse. Everything from whatever fiction I'm currently reading to various textbooks.
Yes the technology still has some ways to evolve, but I don't imagine that the future of books will remain locked in paper for much longer.
Actually, you might be on to an idea.
Can we contact the agents for Ray Bradbury for permission to crowd-source Fahrenheit 451?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
No licensing? I suggest you take a good look at what libraries have to do to not be considered stores.
Also Libraries are trying to do everything they can to get people to visit them. With the internet they aren't used as much anymore.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
-kfg
Harper Collins = Newscorp = Rupert Murdoch = Fox
All I take from this, is that Cory Doctorow needs to have all of his book rights under a better publisher than Macmillan.
How about just keeping actual books in libraries instead? No tech support, no licensing needed.
Right, just physical space (heated, air-conditioned, humidity-controlled, access-controlled space) and staff to store, shelve, check out, check in, reshelve, index, and repair every single print volume.
And the print books are only available during the limited hours the library is open. (This can be a serious issue for individuals with long work/commuting hours coupled to family commitments, especially in communities where library hours are very limited.)
For individuals with mobility concerns getting to the library can be costly or time-consuming, if not impossible. For individuals with limited vision an ebook offers adjustable font size.
In rural areas, it may be impossible for individuals to get to the library by public transit; even library patrons who own cars may need to commit significant time and generate appreciable emissions driving to their nearest library.
Larger cities with multiple library branches can share a small number of ebooks across a large number of branches.
That's why.
~Idarubicin
A. I don't want to spend extra money on an e-book reader, and cross my fingers that whatever e-reader I buy today will be usable next year.
B. I don't need yet another gadget that requires bug fixes, internet access, batteries to be replaced, and headaches. No gadget made today is as simple as a book.
C. E-books is an entire category of products that's fixing a problem that doesn't exist.
I guess that possibly, if you live in NYC or San Francisco, and you have thousands of books, that space may be an issue, but other than that particular circumstance, I can't see what the problem with books is that needs to be solved by yet another expensive, complicated, polluting gadget.
I don't respond to AC's.
They bring jack booted thugs to demand their surrender for burning.
Dude that is so old school. These days you don't need firemen to burn unwanted books/ideas. In a world of electric books on multi-media devices there are two far simpler options:
Respect the Constitution
If you get Nook or some other ereader that supports the epub standard then you're not going to be in that sort of situation. I can replace the battery in my Nook without much trouble, and the device itself is standards compliant. Worse case I have to get a new battery from a 3rd party source and stick with DRM free books, not that big a deal.
Plus, it's just a whole lot easier to read books on an ereader than it is with a standard dead tree edition.
It seems any more innovations in communication and information publishing are about maximizing the sales channel rather than providing value to the consumer.
Now I know how poor rice farmers in India must feel as the seeds from their rice harvest can't be regrown after some clever biotech company introduced a terminator gene to protect their IP and profits.
I mean, really. What are they being paid for? The author writes a book, presumably in digital form... ebook publisher does exactly what before posting it into the Apple store or Amazon? Sprinkle fairy dust on it?
I can see the need for an editor to proofread and make some quality suggestions, so freelance or editing companies, but then? Advertising? Google Ads...
and?
Buh bye publishing houses.
Deleted
not to support those who support DRM, but I can kind of see where HaperCollins is coming from. I mean paper books degrade over time, ebooks do not. I can't claim to know if '26' is the avg borrowers of a paperbook before it gets replaced (or more likely retired), but if HC is just trying to make sure the libraries aren't getting more for their dollar (actually, that HC is getting less $s for their work), then I have no beef with them.