Ethical question: I have a lot of eBooks that I've bought on my Kindle. I have also, for my own personal backup, stripped the DRM from all of them, so they are now standard Mobipocket files (basically readable on any device and easily convertible to ePub for the devices that can't).

I would never distribute these books in a widespread, bittorrenty manner. But would it be unethical for to offer them for "lending" in the style of the B&N lending above? I trust Buffistas to actually remove the book after finishing it.

Frankly, the LendMe feature and library books feature are very compelling reasons to switch to a Nook and the B&N ecosystem, and I may be going there with my next eReader. I wish they didn't have the (IMO) tacky LCD screen at the bottom though. I prefer the simplicity of the Kindle look.

I'm not an author, but I would (selfishly) say yeah, go ahead, Gris.

It's not different than a library, as far as sales go, and I, for one, would be likely to purchase new books by an author I discovered through sharing, just like I would if I read a book at a lib or through a used dealer.

I buy beloved authors new, and ASAP, when I can, so I think this is acceptable practice.

YMMV.

I lend out books all the time. If that's not unethical I'm not sure how lending an ebook would be.

I think I am going to get my boyfriend a Nook or a Kindle. Gris, how do I strip the DRM from my Kindle purchases?

There's probably a difference between ethics and legality here. You may want to closely examine your terms of service. The act of stripping the DRM may be covered (as in, prohibited) by the DMCA. I would consider it analogous to musical file trading. Which asyouknowBob, I oppose. But we do here. Along with other acquiring of digital forms of existing media that makes us clear our throats a lot. So, you know.

Anyway, IANAL, but this board does not officially sanction the circumvention of copyright. Just so it's there.

I used to be a detractor. Then I saw "Shawshank Redemption" and had to take it back. I admit it. But I'm not a horror fan really and at one time I aspired to be a snotty intellectual.

The funny thing is, after seeing the movie a couple of times, I went back to the story. A lot of the movie was there, but there was so much that the movie invented, yet felt true to the original, I was a bit astonished. I still think that story is one of King's best, though.

It almost certainly falls under the DMCA, but technically so does using VLC to watch DVDs. Or at least it did at one point. In other words, it probably is illegal, technically.

Javachik, I'll email you tomorrow. I will not post a book-list here to avoid any potential legal problems for the board but if anybody would like to see it, profile addy is good.

there was so much that the movie invented, yet felt true to the original

My favorite is that they kept Red's line about his name. It fit his character in the story because he is an Irishman there, but played as a wry joke on Red's part in the film when Morgan Freeman says it.

Thanks, Gris.

Anyway, IANAL, but this board does not officially sanction the circumvention of copyright. Just so it's there.

For some reason, this made me grin. Go Liese, being all responsible and legal and shit! :)

I think the Nook's idea is awesome...but I'm not as huge a fan of the actual device. I think, much as I like the page-like screen of the Kindle, that I am going to hold out and buy an iPad probably next year. Loses battery quicker, but can do kindle books and ibooks, and all that jazz. Though pricey. So we'll see if I manage to hold out--I already got sucked in and started buying kindle books for my iphone and computer! (There was a book, and I found out it was a trilogy...but the library only had the third book! So I bought the second on kindle, and then I was IN)