Chris Webb

There is some really great debate over on the TeleRead Blog concerning DRM, copyright, and piracy. As the TeleRead blog has grown, David has added new columnists (disclaimer: including Wiley publisher Joe Wikert) which has really added to the conversation.

David Rothman agrees with Adobe’s Bill McCoy on the use of Social DRM, but also understands the challenges of implementing such a system.

How expensive would it be to run a social DRM system on a mass scale? More or less costly than the current crop of traditional encryption-based systems? Could expenses be reduced by avoiding the use of encrypted credit card numbers and relying on verified names and physical addresses instead—perhaps in cooperation with services like PayPal and credit card companies?

Rob Preece says copyright is not dead, despite what Gerry Faulhaber thinks, and social DRM will only work if all users respect copyright.

If we can’t have social DRM, that is, if users insist on freely copying without regard to authors’ rights, then we certainly will have DRM, no matter what the inconvenience. Because one way or another, the economy depends on our ability to protect the rights of copyright and patent holders.

Finally, according to Todd Jonz the effects of piracy on content producers is a lie.

Yes, piracy exists; it always has, and it always will. But study after study has shown that the vast majority of consumers, certainly enough to sustain a healthy market, will pay a fair price for digital content if it is made available to them in the unencumbered formats they desire.

I know where I land on each of these issues, but I want to know what you think. Should publishers abandon DRM, write off piracy as the cost of doing business, and just concentrate on creating great content for which consumers are willing to pay? How would you feel about the Social DRM model, where we would imprint your name – and possibly other information on your e-content?

(Photo credit: Dori)