P2P and the Publishing Industry - or, Manning and DRM

scrottie on 2004-11-14T16:12:25

Over at Manning.com there was an announcement on the discussion boards that their ebooks were going to go DRM because too many people were trading the pdfs (which may be purchased online at a discount over paper copies) on file sharing networks. I wrote a typically long-winded reply. Since this is of concern to many Perl folks, I'm pasting it in here, too. It's the first time I've collected my thoughts on file sharing (or quite likely and suitable, collected the thoughts I've assimilated from other people).

I pretty well run the guntlet - why aritsts nor file traders are to blame; who is to blame; why it's unavoidable; why falling back on the curve is undesireable; why pushing ahead on the curve is desireable; what non-technical short term things can be done; what medium term technical things can be done; what long term arrangements might look like.

So, here it is:

I'm just finishing up writing "Perl 6 Now" for Apress and a small mystery was solved for me - where do all of those clean PDFs circulating on file-sharing networks come from? Apress is sending out a batch of CD-Rs with production proofs of the chapters to people to review while the book is at the press. When it comes to people trading binary copies of information the mantra to recite is "it only takes one leaked copy". In Hollywood, the guys working the vault for post production were stealingt copies. Then celebrities themselves were trading promo copies of films (and then were caught by water marking). I've scanned out of print books, OCR'd them, and put them on the net. I've carefully proofread them and the quality is quite good; they're in HTML format with the diagrams as GIFs. Again, it only takes one leaked copy. If people are allowed to print copies of ebooks, they'll print to a file as PostScript and have a perfect copy. Only one person once has to figure this out (say it with me - it only takes one).

The pandoras box is open. I know shrinking profits hurt but DRM amounts to a futile effort to turn back the clock to a "better time" when people couldn't copy things or find things. Screw that. Taking advantage of easy copying and easy dissimination of knowledge, you can hire stay-at-home-moms to telecommute, get more feedback from people in the trenches to improve the quality of books in production (think of how Perl Cookbook harnessed the power of perlfaq combined with how C2 and Wikipedia harness the spare time and knowledge of people browsing the web, this combined with your early access program). The only way to beat the curve is to stay *ahead* of it - trying to flatten it is doomed to tragic or humous failure - but always failure.

The wave is technical - the financial return has been squandered by small minded paranoid men who want control, and I'm not talking about the publishing industry. Unemployment in the United States for programmers is above average, the average is at a high since the great depression. We're feeding monopolies as fast as we can, pumping billions of dollars out of the free market and into initiatives that amount to trying to flatten the curve and protect the old world from new technology. This is why people are poor and can't afford your books. This is why *I* can't afford books. Still, I've "wasted" hundreds of dollars I really can't spare on books. I think people are spending a dispropotionate amount of money on books considering both the economy and file trading. Don't blame yourself and don't blame your readers - just do what you have to do and cut back peoples hours, try crazy things, cut costs, get rid of offices, move to print on demand and publish half assed first editions (people talk about ORA as the pinnacle of quality but forget their origins - doing ebooks, print on demand, and publishing not entirely polished first editions).

I finished _Perl 6 Now_ not knowing what my competition looks like. If I weren't writing a book and didn't have a moral duty to my fellow authors, I'd have downloaded a copy of _Perl 6 Essentials_ 2nd ed in a heart beat. But I consider this borrowing on good will when I trade - all of us - especially the kids in highschool without jobs - *want* to speak with our money, so to speak. We want to support our favorite artists, and we want to give them warm fuzzies with their record/book/whatever sales. We want to influence the economy. We want to see more of whatever kind of book or music we like in store isles and we want it to be there because we're spending money on it. We're very captialist, in the best sense of the word, we people at home. It's the capitalists in government and big business who give the culture a bad name.

It's a crime that our culture has been priced at a level we can't afford and we've been improverished so we can't afford it; it isn't a crime to charge for access to culture as long as a healthy public domain exists. But when you feel entitled to make a living, or entitled to stay in business, or entitled to have a copy of the latest Emenim CD that things start to break down - bad things happen when people feel entitled. File traders shouldn't blame the artists (it isn't their fault that the music industry is broken or the economy is rotten) and arists shouldn't blame file traders (ditto).

Speaking of culture, whens the last time you've been to the library? They have CDs and books, but mostly books, and they represent the pinnacle of our culture (or perhaps colleges do, in which case college libraries are the place to be). People read books for free all day long. Books and CDs are more popular than they ever were, but libraries are in decline.

Reading a book at a library is just like downloading a book off the net - you have it, in every sense of the word, but you don't own it. And if you don't own something, you don't value it, and you don't use it, and people know this. No one wants to borrow their friends car whenever they want to go somewhere; theres bad will from the friend, and you just don't feel like you're driving _your_ car while you're driving it. The psychology is huge. ebooks aren't as popular as paper books still because people have a hard time translating feelings of ownership onto magnetic charges, photos, and electrons. I "have files" on my harddrive in the same way as I have a few piles of books next to me right now (entering them into bookcrossing.com - woo!) - it's a temporary arrangement but a useful arrangement and like the piles is nothing but structure and is otherwise ethereal - non-existant.

If at the library you have something but don't own it, here's the converse: how bad would it suck to pay for something and not even have it? That's DRM, and it sucks beyond words. It sucks Dark Ages bad. The back of the curve isn't where you want to be.

I'm not saying you should encourage people to trade books online. Here's a suggestion: get a fast network connection, run eDonkey, gtk-gnutella, Kazaa, and the rest of them, and distribute a copy of the book on all of the networks that's perfect in every way but contains some interesting information (and it is interesting) on how few actually sell (I'm told a moderately successful technical book will sell 20,000 copies), how much authors make (not much), point to your permissive DRM-free ebook policy, list topics you'd like to print books on but had to reject because the market can't currently bare them, and encourage the reader to buy the book if she enoys it and finds herself reading more than a few chapters or referencing it more than a few times. But that's not all. I'm not a hopeful idealist. Watermark all of your downloads. This will have a double effect of fragmenting the copies on file sharing networks as there will be hundreds of copies of the same thing, each different, and this will make searching, ratings, and swarming difficult. And then make it very clear as people go to download that the cost of the ebook is actually $100 more than what they've been charged at checkout but the last $100 is forgiven as long as their watermarked copy doesn't appear anywhere. Then write some software and start collecting. There are Perl modules to speak popular peer protocols and Perl modules to interact with common payment gateways. Coincidence? I think not.

Human behavior can largely be explained by greed and generosity; the old "gift cultures" of native American indians strongly resembles the file trading culture which resebles the Free Software culture. This stems from a desire to gain value in the eyes of the men we respect the most. Greed stimulates people to pay for works-for-hire and to hoard. Hoarding information is no longer possible. So it's all works-for-hire from here on out.

-scott


Further on the changes of the industry...

scrottie on 2004-11-14T16:50:46

What the heck is an email book? Can someone do housecleaning around here? Oh well, never mind.

ORA is having the same brainstorm in the same format (public discussion). A few things are happening: people involved in open source projects are becoming valuable authors... this lets readers connect with the brains behind the creations; the Web is fostering diversity... Webseters picture dictionary is an interesting example of how publishers have to work harder as well as diversify; programming is once again largely being done for fun rather than money so the types of information requested is increasingly along the "Hacks" varity; disruptive technologies like P2P, Xbox Linux, datamining the blogsphere, etc are coming along, and people want to be involved in the sorts of things publishes aren't used to catering to (bunnie's Hacking the Xbox is a cool exception of where a publisher didn't drop the ball); as people depend less on their college education and more on books and the Web for their job, the demand for truly advanced books increases, and it's difficult for publishers to raise to this level - but even harder for the Web to (this has been Addison Wesley's strong hold, though I have a Morgan Kauffman book that would easily force my brain to expand out through my ears).

It's certain that you can't keep doing the same thing you're doing. I've been working on perldesignpatterns.com for a while (free online documentation) so I've been kicking around the ideas of technology, publishing, documentation, collaboration, commercialization, and so on... I get a lot of data on which pages people link to, read, and so on and so forth. Oh - some of the best books done in modern times and historically by ORA are nothing but a massive but organized survey of a subject-area - Perl for System Administration rocks for this reason; Perl Cookbook, ditto; Perl Graphics Programming is another example; Perl 6 Now (Apress) will certainly be one of these. I traded ideas with the original editor for two months before something was settled on; there's certainly pressure to change and lack of clear direction in which way.

Why not not care?

scrottie on 2004-11-18T10:53:44

So my inner gnome (as opposed to my inner troll) asked, okay, why am I so resigned to people trading info online? It's not because I'm a defeatest and I think it's unstoppable. No, that's not it. I'm stubborn as hell and often a fascist BOFH. I don't care because hu-mans are not paid to do worth-while things, and the only time worth-while things happen is when peoplpe ignore compensation at least temporarily and do what they feel needs to be done.

You and I can lament all day long that artists of all sorts be granted a living, but honestly, if we let kids do whatever they wanted coming out of school, everyone would be a guitarist, drummer, sky driver, muff driver, or fighter pilot - except for those of us who would become Free Software programmers, teachers, vets, and missionaries. Whether your perception of what's worth while is humanitarian, creative, or just downright self indulgent, you aren't paid to do what you think is important - unless you're the boss, then you've learned hard lessons about not being able to do what you want and you impose these lessons on your underlings - and you're the boss because you've learned these lessons.

So if we can't all be hackers and painters in our day jobs, is life over? No! From 8 to 5, you should be doing manual labor, customer service, or else using your intellect or creativity for The Man by working in advertising, engineering things that don't benefit anyone nearly so much as the stock holders of the company that will sell it, lawyers, and so on.

Even doctors who usually start out idealistic and humanitarian usually quickly become terminally frustrated with the procedures, law, and non-responsive patiants who won't stop smoking, won't exercize, and won't stop over-eating. A true humanitarian doctor would give up the significant money and travel to an impoverished part of the third world and help sick kids - and sometimes doctors do exactly this - but most often they simply give up their idealism.

Spectacular, you say, but what's this have to do with liberal copyright law and file sharing networks? This: Intellectual work by me is for The Man (Apress, in this case) in which case it belongs to Apress, not me, or else alternatively creative, in which case it isn't work according to my distinction outlined previously. I haven't decided which it is, but it doesn't matter - the end result is the same.

To do something, call it "art", foister it on people, demand money, pout when people don't pay you money... is idiocy worthy and typical of many modern artists - and major record label executives. Yet people accept the premises of these tantrums relatively unquestioned after a good wholloping with the concepts of "ownership" and "intellectual property". RIAA executives don't own the damn music market yet they act like they do, locking independent media out and we accept this because we accept that they're entitled to make money because we selfishly think that we ourselves are entitled to collect money off of whatever creative or intellectual persuits we persue - and the concept of market value is lost.

In my case, just because I did something I think is creative, or I did some labor not necessarily in adequate market demand, I'm not any more automatically entitled to a livelyhood out of it any more than all kids should be paid to do whatever they want to do coming out of high school regardless of demand and market. Let me tell you how it should be - it should be tough, diverse, unpredictable, competitive, and laborous. That's what earning a living should be like. We're not all automatically entitled to an existance on this planet - that's something you have to scrap for, just like our forefathers. To decide otherwise is to say that life isn't worth living unless it's easy.

I don't mean to say that artists don't deserve to make a living (or that the record labels don't serve a living), only that they should be paid only consistently with what the market will bare in a free, open market and anyone who thinks otherwise is only hurting themself.

So, in summary, in the spirit of the GPL, I don't automatically expect to be paid money when I do something (unless I was offered money by someone who ultimately signed a contract) and I think it's dumb to try to collect percieved debts from the world at large on unwanted goods. Rather, work is work and hacking is hacking. Work is what I do to live. Hacking is what I do out of humanitarian or creative motivation and does not and should not be done contingent upon money.

-scott