6 ms·

Why can't we model it like a real book? Even if they limit it to owner -> borrower -> owner, it'd be great to just not have time limits. A market will be crea

by dlsspy 16y ago

Why can't we model it like a real book? Even if they limit it to owner -> borrower -> owner, it'd be great to just not have time limits. A market will be created in any case.

xiongchiamiov 16y ago
I've never really understood this limitation. It doesn't exist for physical books (of which I've bought plenty), and it's the one thing that held me back from buying a Nook.
- jonhendry 16y ago
  I would assume the thinking behind time limits is that a compromised Nook or Amazon account could be used to buy a crapload of books and then lend them out permanently. Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense, because they presumably know who you've lent them to. Then again, non-limited lending raises other issues. How do you get it back? Do you allow the purchaser to forcibly take it back, removing it from the borrower's device? That sucks for the borrower. But that also requires that the device be connected to the web at some point; if the borrower only uses USB to load the device, the loaned item can't be snatched away. Time limits, that don't rely on connectivity, are probably the simplest solution.
  - kklimonda 16y ago
    I don't think the lend feature is going to work "offline", i.e. without participation of Amazon. So Amazon would have a full control over who has lend, what books and to which people. So they can easily deauthorize them. But that wouldn't work if there were no time limit at all - you could lend a book and disable all wireless connectivity. So why not make Kindle users who have lent book reauthorize every 14 days with Amazon's servers to extend the lease.. Sure, some people would abuse this system but it's not like you can't download more and more ebooks from various not-so-legal places anyway. But then the whole thing is useless - seriously, I can lend some books, for two weeks and only once? No, thanks.
- angstrom 16y ago
  I think there's another more obvious outcome. Unlimitted lending of digital content has a lower physical restriction barrier. A secondary marketplace could easily spring up matching people with licenses to those without.
- ghshephard 16y ago
  First - the publishers are profit maximizing, and they would prevent you from lending your physical books if they could. (In fact, they weren't big fans of Public Libraries when they first started springing up) Second - The difference between a physical book and a eBook is that (A) you carry your _entire_ library with you all of the time and (B) your books are never lost/damaged. I'm one of the 5% outliers who actually finds DRM encumbered eBooks (significantly) more useful than physical books - I never lose them, never have to move them, they never take up space, I never have to dispose of them, and can read them anywhere, any time.
  - docgnome 16y ago
    Problem I have with that is that they may be more useful... right up until version X of some new reader comes out that, Oh I'm sorry, doesn't support the older DRM encumbered eBooks so you can just buy them again if you ever want a newer device. Not really a problem with physical books.
    - richardw 16y ago
      Paper books only come on the original device and can't be upgraded for free as printing technology improves. No backup. I'm pretty sure most tablets (and many phones) that emerge in the next year will have a Kindle app.
sliverstorm 16y ago
It'd be a pain in the ass trying to get your book back?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- danudey 16y ago
  They could fairly easily add a 'take back' feature for those cases where you've lent a book to a deadbeat who can't be bothered to dig it out of his digital bookshelf and explain why there are virtual coffee stains on the pages.
- docgnome 16y ago
  More of a pain than with physical books? I've lost books I've lent... real bummer but it happens.
yellowbkpk 16y ago
Because the current model makes them more money? If you can't sell your eBook to your neighbor then your neighbor will (probably) buy it for full eBook price. Boom two sales. (Hey I don't believe it'll work, it's only what I think the publisher execs are thinking.)

by dlsspy 16y ago

Why can't we model it like a real book? Even if they limit it to owner -> borrower -> owner, it'd be great to just not have time limits. A market will be created in any case.

xiongchiamiov 16y ago

I've never really understood this limitation. It doesn't exist for physical books (of which I've bought plenty), and it's the one thing that held me back from buying a Nook.

jonhendry 16y ago
I would assume the thinking behind time limits is that a compromised Nook or Amazon account could be used to buy a crapload of books and then lend them out permanently. Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense, because they presumably know who you've lent them to. Then again, non-limited lending raises other issues. How do you get it back? Do you allow the purchaser to forcibly take it back, removing it from the borrower's device? That sucks for the borrower. But that also requires that the device be connected to the web at some point; if the borrower only uses USB to load the device, the loaned item can't be snatched away. Time limits, that don't rely on connectivity, are probably the simplest solution.
- kklimonda 16y ago
  I don't think the lend feature is going to work "offline", i.e. without participation of Amazon. So Amazon would have a full control over who has lend, what books and to which people. So they can easily deauthorize them. But that wouldn't work if there were no time limit at all - you could lend a book and disable all wireless connectivity. So why not make Kindle users who have lent book reauthorize every 14 days with Amazon's servers to extend the lease.. Sure, some people would abuse this system but it's not like you can't download more and more ebooks from various not-so-legal places anyway. But then the whole thing is useless - seriously, I can lend some books, for two weeks and only once? No, thanks.
angstrom 16y ago
I think there's another more obvious outcome. Unlimitted lending of digital content has a lower physical restriction barrier. A secondary marketplace could easily spring up matching people with licenses to those without.
ghshephard 16y ago
First - the publishers are profit maximizing, and they would prevent you from lending your physical books if they could. (In fact, they weren't big fans of Public Libraries when they first started springing up) Second - The difference between a physical book and a eBook is that (A) you carry your _entire_ library with you all of the time and (B) your books are never lost/damaged. I'm one of the 5% outliers who actually finds DRM encumbered eBooks (significantly) more useful than physical books - I never lose them, never have to move them, they never take up space, I never have to dispose of them, and can read them anywhere, any time.
- docgnome 16y ago
  Problem I have with that is that they may be more useful... right up until version X of some new reader comes out that, Oh I'm sorry, doesn't support the older DRM encumbered eBooks so you can just buy them again if you ever want a newer device. Not really a problem with physical books.
  - richardw 16y ago
    Paper books only come on the original device and can't be upgraded for free as printing technology improves. No backup. I'm pretty sure most tablets (and many phones) that emerge in the next year will have a Kindle app.

sliverstorm 16y ago

It'd be a pain in the ass trying to get your book back?

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
danudey 16y ago
They could fairly easily add a 'take back' feature for those cases where you've lent a book to a deadbeat who can't be bothered to dig it out of his digital bookshelf and explain why there are virtual coffee stains on the pages.
docgnome 16y ago
More of a pain than with physical books? I've lost books I've lent... real bummer but it happens.

yellowbkpk 16y ago

Because the current model makes them more money? If you can't sell your eBook to your neighbor then your neighbor will (probably) buy it for full eBook price. Boom two sales. (Hey I don't believe it'll work, it's only what I think the publisher execs are thinking.)