PDFs: Why are people anti-watermark?

[Alzrius]

Ahh but RPGNow can match up a credit card # to account name. So your real name is still on file somewhere.

So? I've yet to see a store scour a file-sharing network for a watermarked file, compare the name on it to their records, and then take action. And even if they did, they'd never be able to conclusively prove anything.

Sure. Just like I can kick down the door of most locked houses, or take a crowbar to the window of a locked car and have it started (without a key) in seconds.

But of course, this doesn't mean that locking the door to my house is a bad idea. It just makes someone think twice about coming inside.

But you don't go around telling everyone else that they MUST lock their doors too.

Sigurd want to make sure his freedom isn't impinged and I'm all for that. But creators have freedom too and at some point don't OUR freedoms have to be respected too?

Your freedoms stop when someone else purchases the product though. Putting an indelible mark on them that identifies the purchaser indefinitely crosses that line.

I mean, having a store tag reader beep when you walk through and having security check your receipt against the bag is infringing on your freedom too.

That only happens once. Watermarks are forever (well, not forever, but you get the idea).

But the store has a right to a reasonable amount of security.

At the time of purchase. They don't stitch your name into the clothes you buy there.

I never supported a DRM scheme other than watermarking because I want the customer's experience and use of the product to be as full as possible.

But now people are complaining even about watermarks.

Yes, and I think they're not wrong to do so.

I mean, at some point, don't I have a right or two?

Not to the extent that it impinges on others, no.

 

[Sigurd]

Sigurd, that has got to be the weakest argument against watermarking I have heard yet, and I'm a left wing, ACLU card-carrying, New York City liberal.

Go Jaerdaph! The U.S. needs more liberals.

As I said, I am speaking only for myself. You can call it a weak argument or promise that nobody is going to be sued, but I like the roof over my head.

If it is to be a deterrent for people doing stupid things with their purchases, one has to contemplate the whole path and possible repercussions of transgression. I don't think the system is safe enough to receive my name. I don't want to break the system but I don't want to give my name to a system so fundamentally flawed.

I share the mortgage with my wife. All I need is some cracker putting my name in the place where 'owners name' goes. Improbable - ok. But its possible and a risk I wont take for a luxury and a little fun.

Sigurd

 

[jaerdaph]

I share the mortgage with my wife. All I need is some cracker putting my name in the place where 'owners name' goes. Improbable - ok. But its possible and a risk I wont take for a luxury and a little fun.

Just an FYI: they put your order number on there too to protect against that sort of thing.

Anyhow, we should probably drop the political commentary out of respect for EN World's no religion/no politics policy.

But right on, bro!

 

[Vigilance]

Nice to know you guys don't believe cops should be able to arrest people for breaking into your homes.

Since your rights stop where they impinge on the freedom of others.

 

[Alzrius]

Nice to know you guys don't believe cops should be able to arrest people for breaking into your homes.

That's hardly an apt analogy. You can set the terms for how you'll sell your books, but the customers can choose whether to accept or reject those terms. Those who don't want a watermark on their book (and it is theirs once they've purchased it) are hardly breaking into your home.

Since your rights stop where they impinge on the freedom of others.

And they do.

 

[Sigurd]

Vigilance - Where am I impinging on anyone elses rights? Why are you so negative?

Watermark, DMCA your pdfs, make them only purchasable with a pint of blood -- just be clear about the contract you are offering. I would feel badly abused by a company that secretly watermarked PDF's and acted in such bad faith.

Given a clear choice I will never buy watermarks for my reasons but also because I respect your decision. I won't defeat or disable your copy protection - I don't want to & its not worth my time.

The question was put why someone "won't buy watermarked PDFs". These are my reasons.



For the record - I live in a great neighborhood with safe streets. I lock my doors but I would expect people I trust to not let my door deter them if it was an emergency. I'd sacrifice a door for the health of the neighborhood. I still believe that the streets have mostly good people on them 24 hrs a day.

I think PDF publishing is like my neighborhood - It mostly works. In a healthy market, good products = sales. Perhaps the market isn't healthy or it needs to be rebuilt. I loved the PDF sale for Enworld - I bought 30+ Pdfs. Since then my pdf purchases have increased greatly - ask my wife . I check ENWORLD and Monkey God first. I subscribed to Burning Sky sight unseen.


I think the market is maturing and companies need to produce more good material (I know its a challenge) and put some of their stale material on sale (A perception issue). No copy protection scheme is going to make a product last forever - time is enough to make it fail.

Sometimes you make more money with lower prices - especially if you have low production\reproduction costs. In the last little while I spent $100+ on pdfs in part because they were cheaper. If every D&D player did that....



Sigurd

 

[Lorgrom]

A watermark is just a deterrent. That's it. It's a simple door lock.

No one is going to be sued. There's no potential liability.

Hence my earlier question, what real use do watermarks do? If there is no real punishment for sharing said materials, then why use it?

Remember a lock (in the case your useing a door lock) only keeps an honest person from getting in.

 

[Jim Hague]

Most door locks can be easily kicked in too. Detterents are a good thing.

If a watermark makes someone think twice about sharing files, it's a good thing.

If it doesn't, well it's not intruding on the experience of the honest customer.

In other words, there's no potential detriment, but a potential (minor) benefit.

I don't disagree, honestly. I just find that the watermarking is weak enough as a deterrent to not want to bother. And I get weary of the folks that claim that setting one on there (as is the publisher's right) somehow constitutes some bizarre invasion of privacy.

 

[Jim Hague]

Hence my earlier question, what real use do watermarks do? If there is no real punishment for sharing said materials, then why use it?

Remember a lock (in the case your useing a door lock) only keeps an honest person from getting in.

Your statement makes no sense - locks aren't there to keep 'honest people' out. 'Honest people' don't go randomly opening doors or stealing things, Lorgrom. Nor do 'honest people' put the hard work of content producers up on filesharing networks or distribute works whole cloth to others without payment to said producers.

And speaking from experience, locks work just dandy at keeping people who want to steal or ruin things out. You can take that argument ad absurdum, I suppose, and say that a sufficently determined wrongdoer can get in...but the argument is just that - ad absurdum.

 

[Lorgrom]

Your statement makes no sense - locks aren't there to keep 'honest people' out. 'Honest people' don't go randomly opening doors or stealing things, Lorgrom. Nor do 'honest people' put the hard work of content producers up on filesharing networks or distribute works whole cloth to others without payment to said producers.

And speaking from experience, locks work just dandy at keeping people who want to steal or ruin things out. You can take that argument ad absurdum, I suppose, and say that a sufficently determined wrongdoer can get in...but the argument is just that - ad absurdum.

Your right locks are NOT put in place to keep honest people out of something. But all locks can be gotten through or around by someone who is not honest.

Lock = keep someone from taking something
When someone does break into something that has been locked up (and depending on what they were trying to get into, even attempting to break into say a bank). Then there are legal ramifications for said action (fines, jail time, etc).

Watermarks = tracking materials
Unless a publisher, once it is discovered that someone has illigaly shared a file. Does take the person who the Watermarks indicate, was the person who purchased the producet, to court for damages. What real use/purpose do added watermarks to PDFs serve?

Thats my real question, Since it seems that sharing something that is watermarked does NOT cause the person who shared that material any problems, then why even have them?

And just for the record, I could care less one way or the other over watermarks in PDFs. I have seen them go the full range from not seeing them at all (basicaly) to the watermarks being so prevelent that I could not read half of the text.