How I bypassed Amazon's Kindle web DRM

Post by sroussey » Fri, Oct 17, 2025, 1:43 AM UTC

sib wrote: post #125

babblingfish wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Books have got to be the least expensive form of entertainment out there. The value to cost ratio is incredible. Consider buying books to support authors and publishers. If you can't afford it, then libraries are nice too. I personally know people who pirate books, but pay hundreds of dollars a year for streaming services or battle pass type video games. It blows my mind. Books are so cheap people! I recently bought…

I have more than 100 books that I bought with actual money on Apple's iBooks (or whatever it was called back in 2010-2012). I no longer use an iPad and would like to be able to read them on my Kindle. Because of DRM, I can't. I'm all for supporting authors and the various editors, etc., but I feel like I've already done that in this case.

Post by Manuel_D » Fri, Oct 17, 2025, 1:47 AM UTC

semiquaver wrote: post #108

dannyobrien wrote: post #98

Fun fact: this is one of the few situations in the US where a prosecutor could claim that this is criminal speech (though I hope and trust they would not, and if it did it would get thrown out by any court respecting the First Amendment). Not a civil issue, like libel or fraud, but the sort of talk that can get a policeman to come and drag you off to jail. If you've ever wondered why DRM is so roundly hated by engine…

> they made it against the law to even tell anyone. I’m no fan of the DMCA, but I am pretty skeptical of your apparent claim that this post itself is a potential violation of 17 USC § 1201. Obviously the act of circumvention itself qualifies, as does the code in the GitHub repository the post links to, but can you point to any prosecution of someone for a _prose description_ of circumvention (as opposed to actually m…

Post by MengerSponge » Fri, Oct 17, 2025, 1:55 AM UTC

conception wrote: post #143

semiquaver wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they made it against the law to even tell anyone. I’m no fan of the DMCA, but I am pretty skeptical of your apparent claim that this post itself is a potential violation of 17 USC § 1201. Obviously the act of circumvention itself qualifies, as does the code in the GitHub repository the post links to, but can you point to any prosecution of someone for a _prose description_ of circumvention (as opposed to actually m…

I see you don’t remember the dvd decryption key ordeal.

Post by dhooper » Fri, Oct 17, 2025, 1:58 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #145

EARTH TO AMAZON EARTH TO AMAZON PLEASE MAKE THE LAST PAGE READ BE THE KINDLE SCREEN DISPLAY WHEN POWERED OFF END OF TRANSMISSION

Post by nemomarx » Fri, Oct 17, 2025, 2:00 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #155

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That law should be changed. If you distribute your intellectual property with DRM, that work should forever be exempt from copyright protection. You get to choose one or the other, but never both, because DRM effectively removes the work from the public domain in perpetuity. Even accidentally releasing a demo or preview with DRM should invalidate copyright on that software/movie/book/whatever.

> because DRM effectively removes the work from the public domain in perpetuity. This doesn't make for a good anti-DRM argument because the concern can simply be addressed by requiring a DRM-free copy to be deposited at the library of congress (or similar[1]) so it can be released in 150 years (or whatever) it actually becomes public domain. Moreover how would you even define what "DRM" is? Is spotify refusing to pro…