What We Have
There seems to be no lack of opinions on the future of electronic publishing. From trade magazines and newsletters like Publisher’s Weekly to popular blogs like Wikert’s to The New York Times, textual media is bursting with articles and snippets devoted to figuring out where publishing should be and where we should go next. When it comes to analyzing the future of Digital Rights Management technology, however, it’s important to recognize where we are now before forging headlong into uncharted waters.
Having investigated current uses of DRM across the industry, I believe existing DRM systems create toxic economies that threaten the future of publishing.
- DRM accused of ruining sales
Discussions of DRM’s threats most often center around sales. The promises and failures of DRM systems create a cycle between false security and panic among publishers. The problem begins when publishers rush to implement DRM protection for their content in response to the culturally assured threat of piracy. As they chose from the limited field of contenders, the largest publishers often seek out the most secure-sounding options–ones that tightly control the user experience on a device-by-device basis. Finally confident in the limitations they offer, publishers (or Amazon) establish a price point and wait for the copies to fly. Two things seem to happen: first, someone cracks the DRM system, and second, e-book sales are as mediocre as print book sales. The electronic format is then pegged as a liability, as a drain on print sales that can’t be plugged due to the consistent public demand for electronic formats. This distrust serves to convince publishers that stronger DRM is needed, that some other solution must be on the horizon, that the system cannot work the way it does now. On the other hand, supporters of electronic publishing accuse DRM and its limitations on the consumer experience of deadening sales and encouraging DRM cracking. In either case empirical data signifying causation in the assumed negative relationship between electronic piracy and book sales simply doesn’t exist. The threat of DRM–cracked or in tact–on sales, however, does effect the perception of the economy of electronic publishing; if the only actual turmoil DRM causes is the war between traditional and pioneering leaders of the publishing world over what to don next, it should be considered a significant threat to progress.
- DRM that enables reckless publishers
DRM gives publishers, distributors too much control of price and access—creating an ethical trap that threatens both electronic and print publishing. Amazon has too much control over the fate of publishers’ ebooks. Warnings of pricing-backlash are adding up as publishers become more and more focused on Amazon’s distribution system and less concerned with the universality of their products. If Amazon disappeared today, what would those publishers do? If Amazon even fell vastly out of favor today, what would those publishers do? It is not good business to put all eggs in one basket, and DRM and Amazon’s mammoth pull have lulled publishers into thinking that there is a right and a wrong way to publish and sell an ebook. Publishers shouldn’t hurry into the house of sticks just because the house of straw is falling. They must invest in multiple formats and multiple distribution channels.
- DRM that reinforces cultural dilemmas
These monetary problems have created more abstract and potentially “fatal” problems in the information economy. The Darknet—now a culturally acceptable resource for the technologically literate—becomes the only recourse for accessing affordable and hard-to-find materials when DRM forces readers to buy their files from a limited database of books. DRM also pushes users to circumvent its restrictions in order to fairly use the files they’ve purchased. But the DMCA clearly forbids both of these activities, despite any amount of innocence or lack of malicious intent. In Remix (2008) Lessig asked, “should we continue our ritual sacrivice of some kid caught downloading content” or should we “craft a system” that both rewards artists and ceases to criminalize America’s youth (xviii-xix). It’s time to stop reinforcing old ideals when the world clearly functions with out them.
What We Need
- Standardized DRM
A DRM counterpart to .epub–an industry work-group driven, non-commercial venture intending to protect content from illegal use–could revamp the industry’s faith in DRM. There are times where DRM is desirable–secure government documents, records, etc–and the publishing industry is unlikely to relinquish DRM without a fight that may cost the industry valuable resources, so it would be far better to regulate and control how DRM limits (or allows) use of electronic texts than to ignore the situation entirely. Standards should include interoperability; expectations for creating sharing allowances, back-up copies, and copies for owner-only use; provisions for updating regularly; and rules for integration across .epub and other, proprietary formats
- True Interoperability
A truly interoperable file-type would begin the process of allowing readers to reestablish eestablish thelong-form reading experience. Imagine being able to start a novel on your cell phone, catch up on your computer at work, and finish it on a portable device at your leisure. Books once followed us everywhere, so why can’t our e-books travel from device to device to keep us reading in the snippets of free-time we’re now used to. If the e-book is to survive, we must create the ability for readers to start an interactive relationship with long-form works on all of the screens they see throughout their day.
- Recognition and Legitimacy for Instant-Access Lifestyle
There also needs to be a level of recognition for short form works in electronic form. This, however, is as great a challenge to American culture and literary establishment as it is to the publishing industry itself. The cellphone novel may not take off in the U.S., but the American short story is the prime candidate for recharging the electronic publishing industry. It only makes sense that short, digestible stories would be attractive to the modern reader, but resistance to shorter forms seems to be holding on after years of unremarkable sell-through. With good faith jumps and hard work of a few publishers, this may be part of the key to moving readers to primarily electronic format texts.
There should also be a sense of legitimacy conveyed upon the Darknet. The terror incited by the lawsuits against unsuspecting college students sent chills up the spine of downloaders across the country. The pirating didn’t stop, and distrust of media industries only grew. Publishers need to find a way to make better use of the viral nature of information and content in order to better market and distribute their content.
