top | item 717469

Why 2024 Will Be Like 1984: Amazon And The Kindle

16 points| quoderat | 16 years ago |slate.com | reply

18 comments

order
[+] potatolicious|16 years ago|reply
Disclaimer: I work for Amazon, though I am not related to the Kindle team in any way.

This is nothing new - DRM already allows banning of digital material long before the Kindle came about. Back when iTunes was stilled DRMed Apple could easily have de-authorized all instances of a particular song and done the exact same thing. Having the file is a trivial detail - it's no good if you cannot access the decrypted material.

Personally I have faith. We have, in a few short years, progressed from the draconian DRM of iTunes to the non-DRM stores that both Apple and Amazon run today. We have also progressed from restrictive DRM measures on video games to the decidedly anti-DRM stance of major game publishers today.

We have proven that DRM can be defeated, so I wouldn't scream bloody murder just yet.

[+] joubert|16 years ago|reply
I think DRM for literature, news, or other reading material has far more serious implications than that for music, video, etc. The former is a tool to fight against opaque institutions, the latter is just entertainment.
[+] roc|16 years ago|reply
Screaming bloody murder is how we earned those concessions.

Why should we stop? This nonsense is not acceptable.

[+] mjgoins|16 years ago|reply
I hope others will join me in not having any faith. Just ignore the kindle (a.k.a. the swindle) until an open alternative comes along. That's my plan.

Faith doesn't really go too far in maintaining a free society. You have to have legal rights to fall back on.

[+] Freaky|16 years ago|reply
We have also progressed from restrictive DRM measures on video games to the decidedly anti-DRM stance of major game publishers today.

Er, have we now? We've progressed from kernel mode drivers with disc checks to kernel mode drivers with disc checks and/or limited online activations, and most companies still never bother to release DRM-removal patches which even Starforce recommends.

The most we seem to get from major publishers is the very occasional single token game that's testing the DRM-free waters, before they scream in terror and release their next game inexorably tied to some servers they control.. which is pretty much the model described here.

I mean, just look at one of the most successful online game services around right now: Steam. It's online activation with a pretty face, and they can make your games disappear whenever they like, and yet it's hugely popular and people love it. I mean, we trust Valve, right?

Hell, I don't like it, yet 168GB of my 263GB Games folder is taken up by my Steam install; it's frequently the cheapest, and sometimes the only option.

[+] jemmons|16 years ago|reply
I agree with you, but have to laugh at your labeling of the iTunes DRM terms as "draconian". iTunes represented the first case of DRM I can think of whose terms were so fair that most consumers never even knew they existed. 5 computers? Unlimited devices? Unlimited burning (as long as you weren't burning the exact same playlist over and over)?!

I think we're all better off without DRM, but the iTunes model was the next best thing to no DRM at all. Hardly "draconian".