An e-book-biz insider maintains that librarians are among the biggest fans of strict DRM for e-books–because they don’t want their libraries used for illegal copying. The liability and morality issues are obvious. So what’s the lowdown here? I’d welcome thoughts from librarians and lawyers, which we’ll consider in the development of OpenReader.
Coincidentally, in the Shifted Librarian blog, Jenny Levine got a little into this territory a few months ago.
Among other things, while mentioning the audiobook/DRM/format controversy and wondering about a possible DMCA exception for libraries, she said:
I’m not a fan of DRM, but I also don’t want to see libraries used for illegal copying (a whole other debate). Is there an open source type of DRM for these files? I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV, so I’d be interested to hear reactions from others on this.
OK, here’s one, Jenny, from another nonlawyer. If the law requires some level of DRM for libraries, when publishers insist on this, then, yes, I think you’re on the right path in suggesting the use of a nonproprietary approach. At OpenReader, that’s exactly what we have in mind.
As for the level of DRM? Publishers and distributors ideally will be reasonable about the level required. DRM systems should provide for different levels or–where publishers don’t want it–no DRM at all. Some smaller publishrs might actually prefer to offer books without DRM, even to libraries, if their business models allowed for this.
