Any idea how this compares to Apprentice Alf's tools?
This is much newer, but I think it will eventually be included. This tool is an implementation of https://pastebin.com/raw/E1xgCUmb
https://torrentfreak.com/researchers-crack-social-drm-ebook-...
11–20 of 27 posts
Any idea how this compares to Apprentice Alf's tools?
This is much newer, but I think it will eventually be included. This tool is an implementation of https://pastebin.com/raw/E1xgCUmb
https://torrentfreak.com/researchers-crack-social-drm-ebook-...
https://torrentfreak.com/researchers-crack-social-drm-ebook-...
I don't see any reason why you should object to watermarking. Contrary to DRM it doesn't hurt real costumers at all and only helps finding people that distribute books without compensating the author.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A tor-ified github clone would be interesting. You'd probably see a lot of cool pro-freedom software projects that are illegal in their originating country, like this one.
A bunch of version control'd child porn is what I'd be scared of.
That's not DRM, but Watermarking. I don't see any reason why you should object to watermarking. Contrary to DRM it doesn't hurt real costumers at all and only helps finding people that distribute books without compensating the author.
As an example, imagine the user kept 24 books in a personal Dropbox account for easy reading across devices, and someone stole the account's credentials and released the books. The user is now on the hook for $200k in statutory damages despite being himself the victim of a crime instead of the perpetrator.
Every day I see submissions here that are cracks, keygens, etc., and they always get flagged and killed. I'm not familiar with BooXtream, specifically, but I'm curious what it is about this that is different? This is for DRM, sure, but it seems very similar to me.
That's not DRM, but Watermarking. I don't see any reason why you should object to watermarking. Contrary to DRM it doesn't hurt real costumers at all and only helps finding people that distribute books without compensating the author.
"'Books should be used as tools for disseminating knowledge and information. What ‘social DRM’ watermarking systems do instead is turn books into tools of surveillance and oppression by monitoring who shares what knowledge, where,' IBI explain.
"'We don’t like this, and because the publisher Verso has refused to remove the watermarks themselves, we decided to do it for them, and to show everyone how these systems work.'
"But there are bigger issues at stake. While people in the West take the freedom to read books of their choosing for granted, not everyone has that luxury.
"'Imagine if a watermarked ebook contains someone's name (as many do). Suppose that someone is reading that watermarked ebook under a regime that bans the particular kind of material covered in that book,' IBI add.
"'If the operatives of the regime see the watermark, they would then be able to arrest and perhaps even execute the purchaser of the ebook if they too are living under the same regime.'
"But matters of life and death aside, IBI say they believe that people should not only be able to read whatever they want, they should also be able to share that knowledge with others."
Would this not qualify as "producing and disseminating technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent" DRM? Because that's a crime under the DMCA. But I'm just askin', you know?
I am not a lawyer though!