This isn’t a debate about the legality of the matter, but on whether it’s ethical to DeDRM ebooks that you’ve checked out from a library. The publishing company and author are usually paid for each copy that you’ve lent, which is often why eBooks exhaust large parts of a library’s budget. If you are able to loan a book for a month, but you DeDRM it and don’t share it anyone else, and therefore instead finish it in two months, is this ethical? Or have you intentionally reduced the potential for more revenue to the author by instead not lending it twice? Do the publishers predatory licensing fees for libraries make this more ethical?
You must log in or register to comment.
Do the publishers predatory licensing fees for libraries make this more ethical?
Yes. Fuck the publishers for trying to close down libraries with extortionate fees.
Think of it like this: if I had perfect memory of everything I’ve ever read, would that be DRM infringement?
No? So DRM on books is inherently ableist, right?
Don’t give them any ideas. With Neuralink they’ll enforce DRM on our memories.
I think I might literally prefer death over getting one of those chips
Honestly, the author isn’t getting that money. Publishers are using pricing schemes that are intentionally meant to punish libraries. Do two wrongs make a right? Idk. But there is a strong case for anti-capitalism and the freedom to read should be the highest ethical concern.
