This isn’t a debate about the legality of the matter, but on whether it’s ethical to DeDRM ebooks that you’ve checked out from a library. The publishing company and author are usually paid for each copy that you’ve lent, which is often why eBooks exhaust large parts of a library’s budget. If you are able to loan a book for a month, but you DeDRM it and don’t share it anyone else, and therefore instead finish it in two months, is this ethical? Or have you intentionally reduced the potential for more revenue to the author by instead not lending it twice? Do the publishers predatory licensing fees for libraries make this more ethical?
You must log in or register to comment.
I don’t De-DRM borrowed ebooks as I don’t own them (I borrow the book I don’t buy it, it’s a renting contract between myself and the library and the publisher, I want to respect it). I do remove DRM from books I purchased because like with a printed book I expect to fully own what I purchase. At least I did so, since I quit entirely purchasing DRMed ebooks. If I need more time to read a borrowed ebook, I can add extra time to my renting of it.
My opinion is that by not respecting the contract we do no harm to the publishers but we put the very existence of ebook rental at risk, maybe even of public libraries.