I am more convinced than ever that DRM is not the way to go with academic ebooks. Springer has proven that scholarly publishers don’t need it to have a sustainable business model. DRM means lousy service and turning our backs on privacy. Any librarian who has wrestled with the products knows about the service issues, but for a succinct recap read what Wayne Bivens-Tatum has to say. I’ll let the Electronic Frontier Foundation explain what’s wrong with DRM on privacy grounds.
For those librarians who say “patrons don’t care” or “we have to do what our users want,” show me the evidence that they really, truly, have no problem with all kinds of people knowing what pages they’ve read from all of the books they have borrowed and that they don’t mind if Adobe rummages through their reading devices to see what other books they’ve read. I have a feeling they’d say, “Seriously? They do that? That’s not okay.”…
Time to point out the obvious: our readers have no privacy, and we’re part of the problem. What are we going to do about it?
If you’re also at the Missouri Library Association conference, I hope to see you there.