Hachette to TOR Authors: You Must Keep the DRM On Your eBooks

[Gordon]

This is absolutely stunning. Wow. An incredible example of mis-applied strongarm tactics where no rights are held.

http://boingboing.net/2012/08/13/hach...

[Ulmer Ian]

Wow that's horrible. The issue is that many publishers are a small part of a greater media empire and are absolutely irrational when it comes to DRM.

Another is that it doesn't make sense to have authors sign their rights based on region anymore. I've seen this even with e-book exclusive books where Google Books will refuse to sell me the book because I'm in Germany*. I think publishers still have a important role to play, but it's not clear to me why a publisher in London is needed to sell to GB and another in New York is needed to sell to the US for e-books. Someone in either city is perfectly capable of selling books to the entire English-speaking world. Most ad campaigns are online now anyways.

*Mostly it's to my advantage to be in Germany since amazon.de has both British and American books and then I pick the cheapest or soonest. Which goes to show that even with physical books it might not make sense to have nation-based publishers anymore.

[Rob, Roberator]

eBooks make it much easier to self publish, but I imagine there are still benefits to having a large publisher or all the authors would be heading for the hills.

This is unfortunate for all the authors who are caught in the middle. Personally I think it should be up to the author, not the publisher if their books should be DRM free.

I'm personally opposed to DRM and think it leads to more piracy and not less in most situations, but it should be up to the person who actually created the work to decide for themselves.

[Ulmer Ian]

I mean the person who created the work doesn't get to decide on the cover art, I don't see why they have any special right to decide on DRM either. DRM is stupid because it's stupid, not because publishers decide whether or not to use it.

[Ben]

Oh, silly people. Will you ever stop being silly? Probably not. At least Tor has relented. I feel like this is going to be one of those things everyone will feel really embarrassed about in a few decades--"What? You actually tried to lock digital content? There were laws against same-sex marriages? What was up with you people?"

[meaghs]

That comment was classic :)

that company is bound to loose alot of business because of that kind strong-arm tactic...

[Micah]

to my mind they are making the mistake of thinking that noDRM=free. People have shown with music and movies that if it is easily accessible and the right price they will purchase it. Books will be the same way. As was mentioned above by Ben. In a few years everybody will be looking around and wondering why they even tried to lock up digital content. It just doesn't work. And only hurts the people that are playing by the rules anyways. Anybody that wants a copy of something for free rather than paying for it will find one. DRM or no DRM.

[Paul]

Micah wrote: "to my mind they are making the mistake of thinking that noDRM=free. People have shown with music and movies that if it is easily accessible and the right price they will purchase it. Books will be ..."

This is pretty much right on the money.

I applaud TOR and anyone who tries to break down outdated barriers that only exist because people are afraid.