Comments on: e-Book Echo — Silly Library Restrictions, Author Wants Book Pirated

By: SAM

SAM — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 05:52:21 +0000

Because the library book is FREE

By: animatio

animatio — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:41:49 +0000

a last comment – a serious one: libraries never were meant to pay distributors/publishers a lot of money/revenues BUT to make literature, music, film accessible to those who otherways will not have the means to to do so. there are millions of them out there and will continue to be. thus this whole revenue per copy crap is not worth the discussion at all. libraries are meant to make e.g literature socially accessible – not commercially – for that bookstores exist.
just to make another point clear: digital copies can be time stamped protected. means a library lends out a copy for a certain time to read it. after this the document cannot be opened any more. this means too, the point to discuss is not if going digital means to start making people to pay for reading but to change the mode how stuff is lent out. a printed copy of a book has – so to speak – an infinite livespan – in contrast to this a digital copy if it not, this one is short time limited. that’s the difference between a “real, analog” library and a “digital” one. nothing else. if one has to pay extra it’s a bookstore not a library!

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:20:59 +0000

Why would any consumer go for that though, when most ebook readers these days have 3G and Wifi built in because people are too lazy to even plug the things into their computers? :p

By: SAM

SAM — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:01:41 +0000

If a device could be developed that would only hold one book at a time, that can be checked out for X number of days.

You plug it into a “library download” machine.
It registers in a central data base, which library issued the book and when.

The local library can limit how many copies can be checked out at a time. This is what they pay to the author.

You have to return it, just like a regular book
or be charged.

Sure, the copy protection can probably be busted, but make copying the files as time consuming
as photocopying a regular book

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:52:59 +0000

Yes, publishers are the current distribution and PR mechanism. Which is why i suggest the authors band together to create their own system. A simple website for the “Author’s Association” or “Author’s Guild” or what-have-you could be the single authoritative portal for all book news and PR. It can list new works for all authors, and new works by author, etc–a comprehensive catalog. Furthermore, retailers would use this portal to learn about new books to sell. Authors also can use this new structure to gather power to fight against being screwed by retailers. I personally think such an organization could work with the recording industry too.

It’s mostly a matter of organization and authority. If authors organize, they collect their authority and gain collective power.

And yes, i agree that publishers act like a screen between us and raw manuscripts. I didn’t write it here, but at other times and on other blogs, i’ve suggested that publishers transform into a “consulting” service for authors. Such a service can offer proofreading, layout, feedback, market trials, and other services to authors.

By: tal

tal — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:46:07 +0000

BTW you can replace the 10/4 cents with 1 dollar/40 cents. I really have no idea what will work for all parties. Just stating that its either a new business model or non at all.

Actually if I did want to recommend a business model – I would say that if a reader paid 1 dollar to read once and return within 14 days – then if she decides to buy the copy she will only pay x-1. Make the library a true sales accelerator.

Tal

By: tal

tal — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:42:09 +0000

If libraries can’t change their business model for ebooks – like charging 10 cents per book. And then paying 4 cents off that to the publisher/author, then we don’t need libraries anymore.

This is just looking at the issue from a 2 dimensional perspective. Either libraries/publishers/authors adapt or its a thing of the past (soon anyway). I am good with the nature of progression any way it will take us.

Tal

By: Pam T.

Pam T. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:04:19 +0000

I’m all for group discounts. It’s a reasonable solution.

Libraries serve a wonderful role in serving those that can’t (or won’t) pay for a book by providing free or very low-cost access to books. May they live and breathe forever.

(Even if I’m not in a library system that offers e-books.)

By: Pam T.

Pam T. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:02:17 +0000

With a publisher, you have a distribution system and, in most cases, some publicity mechanism. With self-publishing, the entire distribution and publicity burden is on the author. Which, in most cases, will result in lower sales.

And while not universally true, publishers weed out the truly awful work. If you could read some of the manuscripts I’ve read that people think are publishable, you’d run for the hills screaming.

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:30:55 +0000

Perhaps it’s time for authors to change how the industry works, if they feel they have lost their rights. There’s not a great need for publishers anymore since anyone can do self-publishing now. The authors should band together, create a system where they each get nearly 100% of their profits. There’s no need for them to be the pawns of an industry any more. (same for the music industry.)

No better time for change than now.