3 ms·
This article was written by a publisher, O'Reilly, and they are obviously against copying. They don't use DRM because they know that it simply doesn't work, it
by m_for_monkey 14y ago
This article was written by a publisher, O'Reilly, and they are obviously against copying. They don't use DRM because they know that it simply doesn't work, it would be a wasted effort, and as a bonus this way they can look "free", "open" and "cool". Of course they use the words "copying" and "theft" interchangeably, they don't really know or care about the difference, they are just bullshitting.
- slowpoke 14y agoThe sad thing is that publishers could remain relevant by concentrating on what they did before: selling books (yes, the real, paper-y ones). Instead they want to use a technology that is incompatible with their business model (charging for distribution). While I personally prefer having electronic copies of books because I find them much more useful, I know a good deal of people who still buy physical books for various reasons (one of which being haptic), so it's not like they will die out any time soon. Maybe they won't be as profitable anymore, and eventually fade into obscurity, but that's just the way of things.