They all want to get at the guts of the technology because that's where the power is. The idea that information is the property of the buyer, not the originator, also drives file-sharing systems like Napster, Gnutella, and Freenet. The distinction between ownership and licensing doesn't quite apply either, because a license does not usually permit modification of the information and subsequent ownership of that modified code, data or structure. It's been clear since Gutenberg that owning a book doesn't make the sequence of words between the covers yours. But when digitization unbinds the book, making possible not only reading but also revision and subsequent redistribution, it's hard to say precisely what belongs to whom.
Books start to look a whole lot like software.
Stutz's point is reasonable, even compelling, particularly because the publishing industry has thus far failed to differentiate the value of books from their susceptibility to digitization. Nostalgic evocations of the feel of paper or the smell of ink are obviously not going to sway the 22 million users registered at Napster. The publishing industry must find a non-nostalgic way to distinguish books from information, or gracefully admit that it's time to give up the ghost.