Yeah..there's always that risk with a "life time download". That includes if the company goes bust as well.

I would just consider having your own drm free backup. I understand what you mean though :(.

What's the current state of the DMCA in the US? Is it now legal to circumvent DRM in order to backup titles you own? (Not that circumventing DRM will always be feasible for the casual user - see last generation of Amazon DRM for example).

If circumventing DMCA is still illegal in and off itself, I'd be careful by advising people to break the law, without making it clear that they risk some serious penalties in many jurisdictions.

What's the current status of inheriting DRMed works? I know that I'll be able to read the books and comics I inherit - but I'm not so sure about the kindle eBooks - without gaining access to the account of the deceased - assuming it remains active for long enough to do so?

I think you're extrapolating a lot from my post :D. Yes there are laws associated with it.

You bought the book, you own the pdf. I'm not advocating or implying people giving them away.

I'm not sure if you read above but I'm actually an author. Authors don't really make much money when working with publishers..but it doesn't mean I don't want something for my work.

I'm also not going to hand out legal advice as I'm not qualified to comment on or do so.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth about sharing copies (hence inherit, not borrow or get a copy of) - my main point was that while:

>> I would just consider having your own drm free backup.

> You bought the book, you own the pdf.

seems perfectly reasonable on the face of it - it implies removing the drm - which I think is still unclear if it is legal or not (per the dmca)?

I believe there was some case around backing up dvds (a notoriously fragile medium) - as well as circumventing drm in order to view legal copies (eg: play dvds on Linux/in vlc) - but I'm not certain if that was tested in supreme court or not - and if it would apply to ebooks.

I do know that with the initial draft of the dmca, circumventing drm was in and of itself illegal.

Oreilly lets you download drm free copies though? You're not "removing" anything if it doesn't exist in the first place. That's the source of my confusion here.

I won't comment on DMCA regulations.

Ok, might be confused by the context. I would think you only need "drm free backups" if what you get originally is "drm-ed files". If there's no drm, there's no drm. I thought the change was that O'reilly was moving towards drm only?