3 ms·

This is one of those things where the FSF has the completely correct idea, but has accidentally pointed their finger at the wrong culprit. The problem here is n

This is one of those things where the FSF has the completely correct idea, but has accidentally pointed their finger at the wrong culprit. The problem here is not e-books, it's DRM. The article even says as much at the bottom. I completely agree with the whole point of this article but wish it had used this case as a further tie-in to the various other articles asserting DRM's horrible. I think that the use of the specific case with specific examples to draw into a larger argument is often more effective than continuing to just point the finger at the single instance of the problem.

davexunit 11y ago
The FSF advocates against DRM in general as a major part of their campaigns work. Not sure why you'd suggest they are only pointing at a single instance of the problem.
- halosghost 11y ago
  My point was that this particular article doesn't tie-in with the others and instead focuses on this specific case rather than taking this case as an instance of the larger problem and driving the issues with the larger problem home. (Perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been either, doh!)
masklinn 11y ago
> The problem here is not e-books, it's DRM. The article even says as much at the bottom. So… how did the FSF point their fingers at the wrong culprit when they state black on white that the problem is DRMs but that ebooks are not intrinsically problematic?
- halosghost 11y ago
  The title and major thrust of the article is that ebooks are generally bad. The real point only made at the end though is that they aren't, they're only bad when corporations and DRM are in-control. Imho, if they had been clearer from the get-go that the problem is DRM, not ebooks in-general, it would be much more powerful.
  - masklinn 11y ago
    > The title and major thrust of the article is that ebooks are generally bad. Which is not wrong either given ebooks are generally from a DRM-using company (namely Amazon which has the vast majority of ebooks market share)
    - jobigoud 11y ago
      This is actually true only for the US market and possibly the UK one. In other countries it's vastly different. Of the hundred+ books I have on my reader only three or four are coming from Amazon.

davexunit 11y ago

The FSF advocates against DRM in general as a major part of their campaigns work. Not sure why you'd suggest they are only pointing at a single instance of the problem.

halosghost 11y ago
My point was that this particular article doesn't tie-in with the others and instead focuses on this specific case rather than taking this case as an instance of the larger problem and driving the issues with the larger problem home. (Perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been either, doh!)

masklinn 11y ago

> The problem here is not e-books, it's DRM. The article even says as much at the bottom. So… how did the FSF point their fingers at the wrong culprit when they state black on white that the problem is DRMs but that ebooks are not intrinsically problematic?

halosghost 11y ago
The title and major thrust of the article is that ebooks are generally bad. The real point only made at the end though is that they aren't, they're only bad when corporations and DRM are in-control. Imho, if they had been clearer from the get-go that the problem is DRM, not ebooks in-general, it would be much more powerful.
- masklinn 11y ago
  > The title and major thrust of the article is that ebooks are generally bad. Which is not wrong either given ebooks are generally from a DRM-using company (namely Amazon which has the vast majority of ebooks market share)
  - jobigoud 11y ago
    This is actually true only for the US market and possibly the UK one. In other countries it's vastly different. Of the hundred+ books I have on my reader only three or four are coming from Amazon.