7 ms·
You should reread their post, libraries usage is incidental to what they’re talking about. Their point, that first sale should apply to ebooks, requires a funda
by c0pium 3y ago
You should reread their post, libraries usage is incidental to what they’re talking about. Their point, that first sale should apply to ebooks, requires a fundamentally different approach to DRM. If I own my content and can put it on any device I want, how can the seller be sure I’m only using one copy at a time? Consider the case that I might have it on multiple different devices which aren’t connected to the internet, they’re saying I should be able to do that while keeping the requirement that only one copy be usable at a time.
My reference to quantum was saying that this usage pattern would require something like quantum entanglement to replicate the state of which copy is active among all copies.
- j_maffe 3y agoI'm not sure if the librarians in the article meant this but that's beside the point. The publishers can enforce a DRM on their side such that only one reader gets it at a time and adjust the contracts with the libraries accordingly, no need for fancy quantum stuff for client-side DRM.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago> If I own my content and can put it on any device I want, how can the seller be sure I’m only using one copy at a time? They can't, which is the same as it is now. DRM is a farce and everything is on The Pirate Bay. Which is why restricting libraries like this is ridiculous -- anybody who doesn't care to follow the law doesn't need to get a copy from a library, they can just download it from a piracy site. The reason you go to the library instead is that you want to follow the law.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- j_maffe 2y agoThere is no justice in following unjust laws.