Slashdot Log In
Old-Fashioned DRM Protects Harry Potter Book
Posted by
timothy
on Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:27 PM
from the but-is-it-a-good-book dept.
from the but-is-it-a-good-book dept.
RMX writes "The Telegraph has a nice article
about the steps that Scholastic is taking to
protect the content of the print version of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. They're delivering 10.8 million copies and need to ensure that this content isn't accessable by anyone before midnight. Technology includes high-tech (GPS to monitor delivery trucks progress and check that they did not deviate or stop.), low-tech (steel boxes & locks), social engineering notes (crates stacked up in the warehouses of delivery companies across America are marked: Please Do Not Open Before Midnight), and legal threats (As a final layer of security, booksellers have been forced to sign legal forms acknowledging that if they break the embargo, they will never again be supplied with a book by Scholastic). Think how much cheaper and easier it would be if they just used an E-book s with DRM.
I'm all for Harry Potter protecting his rights; but it seems we keep getting closer and closer to the world described in
Stallman's visionary The Right To Read article."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Insightful)
If the publisher wants to save money, they can simply distribute the book like any other book. No one is forcing them to have an embargo until an exact time; they have chosen to do that on their own initiative. So if it costs them lots of money to enforce it, that's their own problem. Why would you want to encourage the publisher to use DRM? How do you think it benefits you as a reader? Or do you have some other hidden agenda?
I'm baffled. If you don't want that world, why are you suggesting that the publisher should use DRM? To prevent it, you should not ask publishers to use DRM, and avoid buying DRM'd products. If DRM'd products sell poorly compared to non-DRM'd products, the publisher's decision as to whether to use DRM will be easy.Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:4, Insightful)
Course, tinfoil hat sells better on slashdot, especially when sprinked with crappy RMS sci-fi (no seriously, it's terrible writing. Terrible.).
One point to remember, however, is that this money on extra security isn't being wasted. First of all, it decreases the chance that a pirated copy will hit the net before the books hit shelves nationally. The ONLY way potter will lose sales is if an advance copy hits the internet a few days before its for sale, and eager readers read the entire thing online, and then no longer see a point in reading it. Otherwise, the convenience of a book far outweighs the extra cost, and people will just buy the book over reading it on their monitor, especially kids.
Secondly, the extra security has gotten Rawlings front page articles on CNN, NYT, BBC, etc. etc. building up the book hype. A SoHo Potter celebration wouldn't make all these news sources; but coupled with the extra security, all the other potter crap gets free press too as article fluff. Just gotta be savvy when playing the game.
Parent
And others do the opposite... (Score:4, Interesting)
Or you can wait until November when it's available in print. The trick is that the download is an "Advance Readers Copy", which they say is unproofed and may change before final publication.
Translation: Buy this one because you can't wait, and then buy the "release" downloadable version in August, and then buy the hardback in November.
At least on the site they admit up front they're taking advantage of you. But either "pre-release" or "strict release", the idea is to drum up interest and business.
Parent
Re:And others do the opposite... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm almost ready to buy it now, just for that honesty.
I've bought a number of baen e-books, preceisly because they have no DRM. You can download them in RTF & HTML, for pete's sake! You can't get any less DRM than that.
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Insightful)
...
Student 1: The dining service hates the coffee house because it's competition. They'd love to shut it down.
Student 2: Yeah, that's so fascist.
Student 1: Where are we supposed get coffee when we're studying late? They close the dining hall at 7:30.
Student 2: Yeah, those fascists want us to buy all our food from them, but they can't be bothered to stay open when we need it.
Me (to student 2): What exactly do you mean by "fascist"?
Student 2: Well, you know, like fascist.
Me: What I want to know is, can you actually define the word "fascist"?
Student 2: ** nonplussed **
Student 1 (indicating Student 2): "Fascist" is anything he doesn't like.
...
Now, I'm really against fascism. Or at least I was pretty sure I was against it until my brother in law, who is a college professor and thus a professional sower of doubt, managed to undermine my confidence in my definition of fascism. After all, what would people like Mussolini or me know about fascism? We can barely define "semiotics". But I'll go out on a limb and say that despite my highly unscholarly view of what fascism is, I'm inclined to hate and despise it.
It also happens to be true I'd really get pissed off if I couldn't get a cup of coffee at 1AM in the morning.
And, if I'm brutally honest with myself, I'll have to admit it's more probable that I'd do something about the coffee house getting shut down than the country going fascist. I don't like believing this, but the truth is, we feel the loss of our comforts and pleasures keenly. Maybe not more keenly than the loss of our rights, but certainly more keenly about the erosion of our rights. That's what makes authoritarianism so insidious: they promise you it won't affect anything you want to do, they won't curtail your pleasures and comforts. If anything they promise to make you more comfortable and prosperous. Any pain that you might feel is in the fuzzy and undefined future. When the consequences become clear, it's too late. Fuzziness is key. You might not believe they can make the trains run on time, but if you don't see any real cost to yourself, you aren't going to be inclined to to stop them from trying.
For that reason, people like my friend Student #2 above are highly useful to the authoritarian. Consciously or not, they actually accept and promote the questionable premises the authoritarian wants to foist on the public. Suppose the premise is fascism is about efficiency and practicality. Most people would agree that it would be nice if the dining hall were open 24 hours, but don't think of it as a moral evil if it doesn't. They understand that if the dining hall were open 7x24, that the meal plans would be more expensive. It's something you can live with and work around. That's exactly what the fascist wants you to think about uniting the powers of the state and business so they can serve each other's interests: it's efficient and you can work around the downside. It's a double bonus: the more people who think A is like B, the more credible the idea feels. The fact that people who don't like B are nutjobs makes people who don't like A seem like nutjobs too.
The cumulative result of years of this is that, while we can all agree we hate and despise facism, we can't agree on what it is. So you can promote any piece of the facist agenda you want, so long as you don't actually call it fascism. If somebody else calls it "fascist", then so much the better: the term is so useless now that only political wackos use it.
We're pretty close to this point with attacks on freedom of expression. Choosing when to publish a book is not digital rights management. It's something that virtually everybody can agree is within t
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Insightful)
With large volume books by big name authors (JKR is currently the biggest name out there right now), strict release dates are set to make sure that the giant suppliers (who pay more to get quicker shipping and more copies) don't snatch up the customers from smaller bookstores by having the book two to three weeks earlier than the smaller stores.
Basically, it's there to make sure that every bookstore has an equal chance to make a sale on a high-demand book. Normal books aren't like this: they just get put on the shelf whenever they arrive. You've got to be somebody BIG (we're talking multiple titles on the bestseller lists at the same time here) to earn the right to a release date.
I have friends who used to manage bookstores. That's why this is done. It's simply a way of leveling the playing field so that small stores can compete.
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:4, Interesting)
Do you really think publishers are worried about the plight of the little book store? if you do then I have some land to sell you. A laydown date ensures a smooth launch. Could you imainge the chaos if for example poter was released by book stores as it came in? A shipment comes in to one barnes and noble but not another, it'd be chaos and people would just give up and wait.
By your argument, why don't movie theaters just start playing movies the day the reel comes in (which is typically a couple of days before it airs) or why movies (dvds, etc) and games are released on specific days?
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because if all the little book stores go out of buisness the publishers would be at the mercy of the few big bookstores and have to jump through hoops to get their books carried.
A diversified customer base is definatly in the interests of any supplier
By your argument, why don't movie theaters just start playing movies the day the reel comes in (which is typically a couple of days before it airs) or why movies (dvds, etc) and games are released on specific days?
I don't know about games but it would be a lot harder for a theatre to quietly show a movie a couple days early. As it happens another poster mentioned with movie rentals (a better analogy) this apparently happens a lot.
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's all about revenue. By having a well publicised street date, they create a false scarcity and a sort of frenzy in the consumers (not the readers -- the consumers, the people with the money). The consumers know they can't get it until whatever date, and when that date comes, they jump on it and pay their 30 bucks for the hardcover. Without the artifical frenzy of the street date, they might not buy the hardcove the day it comes out. They might not buy it at all. They might go for the trade or - god forbid - the mass market paperback. Worst of all, they might borrow it from a friend! Imagine that, all that enjoyment without paying Big Media a dime. It's criminal! Don't even get me started on libraries. Little pinko Bolshevik communes, every one.
Protexting the small bookstores might be a nice thing for the publishers to talk about -- it makes the proles feels fuzzy inside -- but if it wasn't for the fact that they can make twice as much at Barnes & Noble by having a big, hyped midnight release like Revenge of the Atttack of the Phanton Clones, they wouldn't be doing it. Fuck the small retailers. If doing a big release meant twice as much BN revenue and the smaller bookstores had to sell their children to stay in business, they'd still do it.
It's not about small bookstores. I doubt JK's publishers gave them a second thought. It's revenue. And it's not revenue from Fran's Book Barn, either.
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
half right (Score:4, Insightful)
Anticipation yes, restricted supply no. They get as many books out there as they can, so they're not playing the whole "beanie baby" trick where you sell someone a piece of shit, but they want it because it's "rare." Scholastic gets as many copies of HP in stores as they can. In fact, one reason they choose the date is because they *don't* want a restricted supply issue - they don't want either 1) pirates or 2) stores who get the book first to have an advantage.
They want supply to go from 0 to near infinite immediately, so everyone can get a book, pirates have no mathod of making money, and they don't have to play favorites as to which stores get the book first. That way no one gets pissed off.
Parent
This is a big event for young people (Score:5, Insightful)
A new Windows release midnight sale is just a dud fest for insomniac nerds. But a new Harry Potter release is a big event for young people, bigger than Christmas. For most suburban 12 year olds, it's the first time being at public gathering late at night outside their home. They probably won't be downtown again after midnight until they're old enough to sneak into clubs with fake ID.
Parent
Re:It's not DRM, nor would I buy it if it was. (Score:4, Insightful)
None of the measures given in summary have anything to do with DRM or keeping the book from being read. They are about keeping the book from being sold before the release date set by the publisher. A bit like movies usually open in multiple theaters simultaneously.
The book in question is a paper edition, so why did the summary mention Digital Restrictions Management ? And what was that nonsense about "Harry Potter protecting his rights" - was this entire article a troll ? Or is someone trying to discredit Stallman's "The Right to Read" (mentioned in the summary) by getting it connected with this kind of nonsense ?
So yeah, this is bullshit - from Slashdot, not Rowling :).
Now lets see how many times this story, which is libelous (talking about DRM where there is none) bullshit and not related to technology in any way, gets reposted.
Parent
They shoulda used... (Score:5, Funny)
inanicus librarius!
Already Redundant but... (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no "Digital" in PRINT books.
ARGGGGHHH! Please Mr. Submitter, know the terms you are using. Yes DRM is bad, but the first DRM I am aware of is floppy disks with copy protection. That's the oldest there is, everything else before that was just "rights management".
Er? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Er? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that the author JK Rowlings [forbes.com] would beg to differ with you.
Parent
Re:Er? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Security at the press (Score:3, Funny)
Counter Charm (Score:3, Funny)
-Peter
What's with the allusions and conspiracies? (Score:5, Insightful)
What exactly is wrong with protecting your product? In a world of rip-offs and general immorality it's not very uncommon for products to be ripped off before release, or stolen from trucks/docks/etc
I myself know of workers who admit to stealing the cargo they're supposed to be loading.
There's a lot planned around the time release of the product, and realistically while they are securing to get the biggest "bang" for their own bucks, the publisher is also making things more fair for the distributers by ensuring that everyone gets the same release date, and thus no one store can steal the business from others early
This is idiotic. (Score:5, Insightful)
I read that essay and this has nothing to do with it--and everything to do with a company trying to keep up the suspense of a massive bestseller right until the publishing date. And then after that all the locks go off and this will be distributed just like any other book.
ahh.. no.. (Score:5, Insightful)
First, DRM of course means "DIGITAL", this is anything but digital.
Second, this has nothing to do with "rights". You have no right to a harry potter book. You have no right to a harry potter book before it's supposed to be released. You have no right to read a wrongly acquired book so you dont have to wait a few days.
Third, this type of crap dilutes the idea of a "right". You DO have the right to free speach, to freely assemble, to seek a redress of your grievances. You DO NOT have the right to steal someone elses physcial and yes intellectual property by getting a Harry Potter book (a) without paying for it and (b) against the express wishes of the author and publisher.
GROW UP.
Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
Thomas Jefferson said it best:
Parent
Jumping on the bandwagon (Score:5, Insightful)
Shameful.
Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not digital rights management, because there's no digital product being managed.
Also, putting a sign up is not social engineering as others have pointed out. As the word "engineering" implies, usually more thought and cleverness is required before people consider something to be social hacking or social manipulation.
Actually, it is (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Release Dates. (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason you have release dates is so that ALL dealers have a chance to sell the book. Otherwise the stores with better distribution systems would get it in stock first, while the others would have to wait.
Then the publisher would have to worry about which store to ship to first, because the first store who receives it has a massive sales boost.
Eventually, every small bookstore goes out of business.
This whole submission makes no sense. It has nothing to do with DRM.
Re:Release Dates. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is also the reason many home video arms of the studios have "street dates" for video releases. Right after college, I temped in various studios in Los Angeles. One interesting job was calling up video stores that had "broken street" (started selling or renting a video before the authorized date), getting the manager on the phone, and then transferring them to a mid-level Disney exec, who would reduce them to jello.
What was interesting, though, was the water cooler talk. If Costco or Walmart broke street, they didn't get the intimidating phone call. While the little guys couldn't afford to lose Disney, Disney couldn't afford to lose Costco and Walmart.
- Greg
Parent
I want PAPER (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, DRM based on a "do not read before" timestamp would be hard to effect. It would require that any reader be set with an unhackable internal clock that knows the time zone the reader is in, otherwise people could circumvent the "do not read before" settings rather handily.
I think the argument here is a bit difficult to support.
- Greg
Point Missed (Score:5, Informative)
Out of Touch with Reality? (Score:5, Funny)
Just a little nit to pick but... uhm you see Harry Potter is a fictional character. J. Rawlings in the author of the Harry Potter books and she is protecting her rights. Now as to Richard Stallman being real or a work of visionary fiction, well, that is a moot point.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The point of the embargo is so that if store A gets the book three days before store B they don't mark it up by 200 percent.
Now eBooks, more importantly DRM ebooks - there is some serious erosion of rights.
With the physical book I can read it, then I can give it to others to read. It is really a hell of an investment. What $25 - $30 and the usefulness is unlimited when you consider that once it is bought there is no limit to the number of individuals that can read it.
But the entire point of DRM eBooks is to force the public to purchase one book per reader.
I stand behind Scholastic on this one.
Besides, you are talking bad about Harry Potter. Rowling deserves a medal. She has written a series of books that CHILDREN WANT TO READ. That is so cool.
Re:Stupid, stupid, stupid.... (Score:3, Insightful)
My youngest daughter started reading the books when the third one came out, is now 16 and can't wait for book 6. She even got my wife and I to read them, along with her older sisters. Not a bad story at all, and yes Rowling deserves a medal for getting a large par
Submitter is an idiot. Scholastic is right. (Score:3, Insightful)
I fully support Scholastic's decision to take what steps are necessary to try to ensure that everyone gets an equal shot at reading the book before it gets spoiled all over the press.
It is too bad that they need to do all of these things to give everyone an equal shot, but that is hardly Scholastic's fault. If they didn't take these measures, we would be calling them morons for not taking reasonable precautions. In fact, they would probably get their asses sued off by unhappy readers.
Hey, here's an idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Think how much cheaper and easier it would be if they just shipped it out like other books and didn't fucking worry about it.
Naww, crazy idea, don't know what came over me!
No, it doesn't (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they want a big release. Since when has building up a little anticipation been a crime? Scholastic is enforcing this in a fine fashion. They are stepping on nobody's rights, all they said is "if you mess this up for us, we're not doing business with you again.".
Non sequitur (Score:5, Insightful)
After you buy the book, your rights are the same as with any other book.
Your rights are not being infringed upon.
There is nothing to see here.
Have a nice day.
Well, um, who gives a fuck? (Score:4, Insightful)
She wouldn't be a millionaire with e-books (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, except that e-books are only used by a small and to my mind somewhat confused micro-minority, and for good reason -- you are not going to sell 500 trillion of them, or whatever the number is they are aiming for this Harry Potter (full disclosure: I have the whole series, too). E-books are a pain to read in the sun, are a risk to read in the bathtub, can't be dog-eared (my book, my rules), won't survive having your backpack thrown in your locker, writing a note on the second page when you give them to your kid sister is sort of hard, and you can't include them in your Delicious Library [delicious-monster.com], just to name a few real-life problems. In other words: E-books are good for the publishing company, but not for the customer.
I would like to predict they are going to die like web push technology. But unfortunately, capitalism in the 21th Century is not about what the customer wants, it is about what big multinationals can get away with. When you buy an e-book, you are helping them screw you. If you want a tech toy to look cool, get a frigging iPod, that's what they are there for. But please don't support the attempt to kill something that has served the human mind for more than 2000 years.
If I ran a book shop (Score:4, Interesting)
2. sign legal document declaring they will never give me any more books if i break the contract
3. start massive advertising (pre-planed) campaign: Internet, tv, driving a van around with a poster and megaphone all within minutes of getting the book in stock
4. offer the books to the absolute highest bidders, take advantage of rich kids, yank the prices up as high as they can possibly go.
5. Call up scholastic say: "If you want me to stop selling these books I will sell you my remaining stock.. for a fee, and even give you a list of people I sold them to."
6. Proffit
This isn't real DRM, and it certainly isn't to stop piracy, this is just their hype machine and if you play it right you can make some serious profit off it and probably quite legally except for that pesky civil court.
Re:If I ran a book shop (Score:4, Funny)
I'd just turn up at the back of the crowd somewhere with a digital camera taking pictures of all the spoilt brats screaming at their parents at 1am, when they finally decide to give up queuing.
All the more fun if it's pouring with rain then also...
Parent
Re:Red paper? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Red paper? (Score:5, Informative)
Tell that to the fundamentalists who burn Harry Potter books and try to get them banned from school and public libraries. Witchcraft and wizardry are prohibited by scripture, and the Harry Potter series paints such occult pursuits not only in a positive light, but places people who practice these evil arts in the role of hero and role model.
I'm not saying I agree with that point of view. But in some people's minds, Harry Potter is closer to Satan's Bible than you may realize.
- Greg
Parent
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are parents really going to line up at midnight to buy a kids book? Why bother? the kid should be in bed at that time anyways.
You're kidding, right? For the last few books' midnight release dates, the lines have looked like the childrens' version of all of the l00sers lining up for Windows 95 oh-so-many years ago.
Any parent whose kid is THAT eager to read a book--any book--should be encouraged, even if it's staying up late on a summer night. Beats the hell out of them staying home playing GTA or something else equally mind-numbing.
Parent
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
did you seriously post that? Yes.. those darn fat unhealthy book worms. Kids shouldn't be allowed to read or even be excited about books. Shame on those uneducated book readers!!!
Oh.. and smarty pants.. it's "more important than" Not then.
seriously, perhaps if you read more you would know this.
i couldn'
Re:I have another idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I have another idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Customers practicing something called self-restraint [reference.com] would also acheive this. But no, it's much better to have customers need publishers to stop themselves from being screwed over.
Adults are able to control their desires to a degree, and not need something as soon as it's available. Creating an artificial release date is just silly, and if it truly is
Street Dates are Important... (Score:5, Insightful)
They're trying to prevent two things:
1) Price gouging..."yeah, you can buy it 3 days early, it'll only cost you 10 extra dollars!"
2) Retailers who get the books earlier from having an unreasonable advantage over those that don't. This often translates to large retailers versus small retailers...Target already has an advantage on price, now imagine if they also had it on the shelves 2 or 3 days early.
Street dates are nothing new, and certainly not a bad thing. This has been an accepted practice on movies, music, and books for quite some time, long before Harry Potter was ever concieved. When you're releasing something like a book or a movie to thousands upon thousands or retailers, it's impossible to get it to all of them the same day...street dates are established so the item appears on everybody's shelves at the same time, thus promoting fair competition.
We do like fair competition here, right?
Parent
Re:Street Dates are Important... (Score:5, Interesting)
Books generally don't recieve this kind of attention, because there isn't that much marketing associated with them. However, you have probably known the street date for movies or music you've bought (assuming you buy these things) even if you didn't realize it. Street dates for movies are well advertised, especially big releases. And that "this item won't be released until" notice you see on Amazon.com is also letting you know the street date. The only reason you are seeing this with Harry Potter is because of the large popularity of the book...the concept is nothing new. Walk into a Barnes and Noble and look around...you'll see signs posted announcing the street dates of various upcoming books. The only reason it doesn't make news is because nobody cares...they aren't as popular as Harry Potter.
The publishers did not create the frenzy on this on, sorry to say. The customers did. And they are only enforcing their release dates this strictly because the more popular the item, the more likely the street date will be broken.
This whole schmegegy has little to nothing to do with fair competition, but a whole lot to do with marketing, drumming up the fervor of the torch and pitchfork bearing mob that makes it appear the security measures are necessary in the first place.
I can say it is very much about fair competition. Think of it this way...do you think that Harry Potter would sell that many less copies if a few stores sold it a day or two early? I don't. So it does NOT affect the publisher. But by enforcing a release date they can protect themselves against accusations of favoring one chain of bookstores over another, for instance, because they got their copies first and it gives that bookstore an unfair advantage.
You may or may not have ever worked in retail, so this might seem like it's a new thing to you. I was once manager of a Blockbuster Video (evil bastards that they are). We would sometimes get movies as much as a week before their release date. But our agreement with distributors forbade us from displaying them until the official release date. Not only did we honor that, but at random we would actually send employees to other stores to make sure that nobody else broke street date either.
Again, street dates and the strict enforcement of them are nothing new. The advertisement of them is nothing new either. Walk into any video store (and even many bookstores, as mentioned) and you'll see posted the dates of upcoming releases. The only reason this is news at all is because of the gigantic popularity of the Harry Potter book that's coming out. And that buzz was _not_ created by the publisher for the release of this book...it was created by the widespread popularity of the previous books. The Harry Potter books are as popular as many blockbuster movies, and they are being treated as such. I personally find it uplifting to see a book getting this kind of treatement; I had long since gave up and figured that most people in the US were just illiterate.
Parent