Here is an excerpt from Adobe e-booker Bill McCoy’s new post in his DRM debate with library tech guru Peter Brantley:
Now, let me say up front that I don’t think ebook DRM is "good good good" any more than I think that of taxation, standing armies, or the proliferation of nuclear technology. But although one may dislike taxation, one may dislike even more the likely consequences of eliminating taxes (diminished schools, roads, law enforcement, …). Peter’s post focused on negative attributes of DRM in isolation. But to me, the important thing is to look at likely outcomes given various scenarios, and to consider what these outcomes would mean for the principal actors involved (authors, publishers, and readers). Not whether something is good or bad but whether it’s better or worse than the likely alternative.
To me, it’s pretty clear that the establishment by the industry of a broadly adopted cross-platform ebook DRM system should lead to a significantly better outcome for all concerned than if no such platform ends up getting established. "DRM" is a somewhat loaded term: to clarify, by "ebook DRM" I mean a relatively lightweight means of limiting and/or discouraging copying and use beyond publisher-permitted limits, intended more to "keep honest people honest" than to totally prevent copying. After all, a book can be scanned and digitized, or even re-keyed, with only a middling level of difficulty — so aiming for "ironclad" DRM is not warranted, even if it were feasible.
Your thoughts?
When, oh when, will the IDPF release a logo for non-DRMed ePub books? And how about standards for reliable interbook linking? Or for annotations? Or more international representation to help the group live up to its name?
If you sit on the IDPF board, which now has an opening, you can encourage the organization to address those and many other important issues in a timely way. Or—if you’re from outside the U.S.—address the international matter directly. The IDPF includes people from international conglomerates. But I’d like to see more of those from, say, the U.K. directly.
Although just one of nine seats is open, this is a chance to remind the group of issues dear to you even if you don’t win.
Important restriction on eligibility (update, 1:40 p.m.): As Paul Biba correctly jogged me just now, you must be associated with a member company of the IPDF. But many faithful readers of the TeleBlog do. What’s more, you or your employer can always join the IDPF to qualify. Here’s a chance to help effect reform from within the “inside.”
You have up to Monday, November 10 (2400 EST(, to self-nominate yourself. Go here for more details, then e-mail IDPF exec director Michael Smith (himself Canadian).
Related: IDPF’s latest e-book sales stats.