Are Adobe Secretly Watching You Read Via DRM?

The question of privacy on the internet has once again raised its head with the posting by Digital Reader on Adobe’s ACS DRM system and what is claimed to be excessive data gathering of personal information from consumer’s elibraries.

We can’t comment on whether the facts as presented are true or false, but we are able to say that if true, they are a significant shift from where Adobe started from and seriously question the role of DRM and whether consumer privacy rights have been breeched.

Abobe DRM history goes back many years. ACS3 was widely used by retailers but effectively broken and open. The start of the latest ebook revolution was initiated with the introduction of the eInk readers and when Sony entered the fray they wanted a DRM system which would effectively give them a march on the rest. Adobe also wanted to regain control of a space they had clearly lost. Overdrive had also built a ACS4 beta that they were using to control their market. We remember Adobe’s introduction of ACS4 and their lack of market awareness and often rigid mind-set and coupled with Sony’s desire to rule the world, we had many often fraught conversations with the two of them but the rest of the market wasn’t ready and so they won the initial battle. Years later it’s a different story and many have either migrated to their own DRM. Amazon and Apple never did join and Kobo and Nook grew alternative offers and Overdrive stuck with their own variant.

Adobe then went into what can best described as the Dark Ages where they still championed interoperability, but where leaderless and gave up trying to manage micropayments and gave this up to a small handful of agents who managed the retail facing activity and collected the money. They then came up with ACS5 or a tighter model which was part born out of the fact that ACS4 could easily be broken by anyone who asked the right questions on the Internet and part by the fact that they were clearly being squeezed out by the big channels. Unfortunately ACS5 has some basic issues which forced Adobe to retract their initially statements and backtrack on their timelines to force full migration to the new platform.

So today we have the news that Abode appear to be data gathering consumer usage information at title level and also at library level. What was read when, what wasn’t read, and probably much more? Is this right or wrong?

Well Adobe provide a DRM locking service aimed at validating ownership and stamping this such that they can ensure rights are managed with respect to devices, etc. Why on earth do they want to gather data on usage other than to sell back to publishers, retailers and libraries. Did they offer and opt in, or opt out to consumers is a mute question and we would suggest that they had to in order to snoop.

They apparently doing this not through the standard interface with hosting sites but through a mole application in Digital Editions that they plant into the consumer library or device. We would like to see the snooper application flagged as unauthorised by the security systems and users being given at least the choice of allowing it in. Whether the Adobe service will work without the mole is an interesting question.

We have to accept that Amazon, Apple, Nook, Kobo and Overdrive all can gather information on their consumers and their walled gardens allow this, but they are walled gardens. Adobe promotes itself as open and interoperable and importantly does not have consumer customer relationships to build in the same way. Again it begs the question what do they intend to do with this information and is it being resold and if so to whom?

However, all this a new news and we await more information about Abode’s intent and what is behind the intrusion into consumer’s private libraries and reading habits.

Personally, if the facts bear up to what has been reported, then Adobe has single handily done more harm to DRM than all the articles every written about it. Consumers if made aware of it will probably shun and question the violation of their privacy.

Finally, we hope that the wider media picks this story up and fully investigates it and if collaborated exposes it to the consumer.  

Digital Reader : Adobe is Spying on Users, Collecting Data on Their eBook Libraries 

6th Oct 2014

Who Is Recording What Behind Those Glasses?

Why did VHS win in its infamous war with Betamax? The answer was largely down to the introduction of the first VHS camera. Why did that make a difference? It enabled the pornography market to create cheaper, more edgy films and importantly enabled amateur pornography to flourish. This is turn created demand and demand reduced prices and being able to capture film became as important as watching films

Pornography has always been at the cutting edge of technology and it is now interesting to hear of their obvious interest in the forthcoming Google Glass. The technology will enable users; to capture close and intimate hands free action, upload it live and even for some users to watch their pornography dreams whilst they do whatever they wish. An Android app store MiKandi is already planning to make content to watch on the new technology.

Just like the early VHS cameras made us all film directors and actors so the new technology promises to take that a stage further and free our hands and make everything filmable. Everyone you see and meet could be filming us on devices that are ‘connected’ to the world.

However, trying to ban or curtail the use of the new technology might be like trying to ban people using mobile phones. The technology itself is only going to get cheaper, smaller and even less detectable. We are entering the world where everyone could be potentially filming and uploading images at any time. The question is not how we control pornography, but how we protect civil liberties and privacy.

Once the butler peeked through the keyhole to glimpse at what was happening behind closed doors, perhaps soon he will merely be able to film through the door itself and instantly stream it to the world. 

Who Do You Trust?

We all know the track record of the likes of the UK government for loosing data, or Monster.com in having it stolen but just how much stuff is really out there and what have we all disclosed about ourselves to ‘trusted parties’? Social networks potentially have the greatest exposure as not only do they have high level personal details but more importantly our thoughts, insights, likes and dislikes.

This month, Facebook updated its 175 million active users worldwide member’s terms and deleted a provision that said users could remove their content at any time, at which time the license would expire. It added new terms that said Facebook would retain users’ content and licenses after an account was terminated. So even if you want to walk away your information doesn’t!

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, in writing on a blog post on Monday appeared to contradict the new terms, ‘that people own their information and control who they share it with has remained constant.’ Others have suggested that, ‘ anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later.’

The blog post by Consumerist reportedly, received more than 300,000 views and users quickly created Facebook groups to oppose the changes.

We are reminded about a US west coast supermarket who used individual’s shopping baskets and habits to promote what they didn’t buy, get them into parts of the store they didn’t visits and to fight off any competitive threat in the neighbourhood.
As Facebook turns 5 years old and social networks evolve the balance between privacy and exploitation, the right to say no and the ‘sign here and ignore the small print’ and the we are big and therefore trusted parties may become more concerning.

Sometimes the context, the information about information, can also become more valuable that the information itself alarming.

Reading Habits Protected in US

What did you buy last week or the week before? What books have you bought from Amazon?

We read about US Federal prosecutors withdrawing a subpoena asking for the identities of thousands of people who bought used books through online retailer Amazon.com. The withdrawal came after a judge ruled the customers have a First Amendment right to keep their reading habits from the government.

Federal prosecutors issued the subpoena last year as part of a grand jury investigation into prolific seller of used books on Amazon.com. Robert D'Angelo, was indicted last month on fraud, money laundering and tax evasion charges. It was claimed that he ran a used book business out of his city office and did not report the income. D'Angelo sold books through the Amazon Marketplace and the prosecutors were looking for buyers who could be witnesses in the case.

The initial subpoena sought records of 24,000 transactions dating back to 1999. Prosecutors later narrowed the subpoena, asking for a sample of 120 customers. A compromise involving sending a letter to the 24,000 customers describing the investigation and asking then to volunteer was then suggested. Finally they found the information on his PC.

The lessons are that Amazon does protect data even when under legal threat to expose it and often those searching will go to what they see as the easiest route before looking under their very noses. It’s a good job they weren’t in the UK they would have probably lost the information to a man on route..