Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:43:59 +0200
Subject: Can Freedom Withstand E-books?


Also available here:
http://www.ifi.uio.no/~thomas/freedom-versus-ebooks.html

----

           Can freedom withstand e-books?
                   Richard Stallman

In 1997, Communications of the ACM published a science fiction
story of mine called "The Right to Read", which described a world,
fifty years hence, in which it was illegal to lend your books to a
friend.  Faster than I anticipated, this is coming to pass.

You may have noticed a great deal of hype about e-books in 2000.  The
reason for it was surely because the publishers are eager to establish
the new world of their dreams.  In that world, you no longer have the
freedom to buy a book from a used book store, to lend it to a friend,
to borrow it from a public library, or even to buy it without leaving
a record in a corporate data base stating your identity and what book
you bought.  (The thorough surveillance that the FBI longs for, but
dares not ask for, will be established for it in the name of copyright
enforcement, and meanwhile used also for telemarketing.)

Reading books on a computer does not have to threaten our freedom, but
the publishers are using e-books as an opportunity to take it away.
The publishers would like to simply abolish these freedoms for all
books, but that would be too blatant and arouse too much opposition.
So they have a more intelligent strategy: to launch e-books as a "new"
medium in which these freedoms have "never" existed, then over
subsequent years gradually eliminate most paper books in favor of
e-books.

Using encryption and watermarking systems, publishers hope to connect
every copy of a book with a known person, and prevent anyone else from
reading it.  The publishers hope that some people will find "advanced
technology" so exciting that they will willingly give up their freedom
to use it.  Meanwhile they are recruiting business partners to
pressure other people, perhaps not so willing, into accepting e-books
with their restrictions.  For example, a dental school has already made
plans to require its students to get their textbooks in this way.

If we readers value advanced technology, or convenience it might give
us, more than our freedom, we will presently lose our freedom.  The
other alternative is to reject e-books that give us less freedom than
a printed book.  That is what I am going to do. Join me, and speak out
to condemn the publishers' plans, and we may manage to preserve our
freedom.


In July 2000 a writer asked to write a profile of me, for publication
as an e-book.  The publisher hoped to issue this e-book early in order
to boost the acceptance of e-books.  I agreed to cooperate, provided
it would be published in a way that would respect the readers'
freedom; the writer expected to be able to achieve this and made it a
commitment.

But when it came time to work out the details, no agreement could be
reached.  The publisher was determined to publish an encrypted,
watermarked, trackable e-book, and offered only the concession of
publishing the text in another less-fancy form which would not be
restricted.  I concluded that only making the actual e-book visibly
and markedly less restrictive than what is generally planned could
make my participation a positive act; so I declined.

Strange to say, the publisher's representatives, despite knowing full
well what my views are, were surprised that I planned to base a real
decision on them.  Apparently they expect criticism of business
practices to be a purely theoretical matter--not to be reflected in
personal decisions, and not to be applied to their activities.


Copyright 2000 Richard Stallman
Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire article are permitted
in any medium provided this notice and the copyright notice are preserved.

----