Comments on: They just don’t get it http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:28:10 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Adam Jasper http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012801 Adam Jasper Sun, 15 Feb 2009 14:44:04 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012801 Paul Aiken, head of the Author's Guild, was also a driving force in the law suit that was taken out against the Google Library project in 2005, and which has since resulted in a hundred million dollar out of court settlement and a lose-lose for readers, in that it restricts the availability of samples of hard to find books for all except for those publishers that "opt-in", meaning that material released by small publishers and those that no longer exist (Such as calder and boyars, a personal favorite) is proportionally less likely to be made available, even in excerpts that would allow me to identify and buy out-of-print texts that I'm interested in. To make it worse, the three named appellants in the "class action" the AG undertook consisted of a minor children's book author (betsy miles) and two octogenarians (daniel hoffman and herbert mitgang, born in 1920, for God's sake) who between them would have had *nil* idea of the importance of digital publishing to today's students. It made me bilious to imagine those three setting themselves up as spokespeople "on behalf" of all authors, everywhere. Presumably they were patsies enlisted by the AG administration. I've spent the last two hours digging up stuff on this case on the web, and the more I look, the more cynical and duplicitous the AG's pronouncements appear to be. Paul Aiken, head of the Author’s Guild, was also a driving force in the law suit that was taken out against the Google Library project in 2005, and which has since resulted in a hundred million dollar out of court settlement and a lose-lose for readers, in that it restricts the availability of samples of hard to find books for all except for those publishers that “opt-in”, meaning that material released by small publishers and those that no longer exist (Such as calder and boyars, a personal favorite) is proportionally less likely to be made available, even in excerpts that would allow me to identify and buy out-of-print texts that I’m interested in.

To make it worse, the three named appellants in the “class action” the AG undertook consisted of a minor children’s book author (betsy miles) and two octogenarians (daniel hoffman and herbert mitgang, born in 1920, for God’s sake) who between them would have had *nil* idea of the importance of digital publishing to today’s students. It made me bilious to imagine those three setting themselves up as spokespeople “on behalf” of all authors, everywhere. Presumably they were patsies enlisted by the AG administration. I’ve spent the last two hours digging up stuff on this case on the web, and the more I look, the more cynical and duplicitous the AG’s pronouncements appear to be.

]]> By: Jessica Freely http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012444 Jessica Freely Sat, 14 Feb 2009 04:51:22 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012444 Publishers won't get very far selling ebooks at print prices, I don't think. Readers won't stand for it, nor should they. One per-unit cost that hasn't been mentioned, though, is the author's royalty. I would really like to know if S&S, in the unlikely event that they succeed in selling ebooks at print prices, will share their increased revenue with their authors. Given the lower overhead, we make 35% or better in epub, while in print, royalty rates are around 10%. Publishers won’t get very far selling ebooks at print prices, I don’t think. Readers won’t stand for it, nor should they. One per-unit cost that hasn’t been mentioned, though, is the author’s royalty. I would really like to know if S&S, in the unlikely event that they succeed in selling ebooks at print prices, will share their increased revenue with their authors. Given the lower overhead, we make 35% or better in epub, while in print, royalty rates are around 10%.

]]> By: Logan Kennelly http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012377 Logan Kennelly Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:13:47 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012377 Jack, you are making a mistake in your costs, though. The publisher doesn't pay for the webmaster, the pos clerk, the server farm, or the ISP; those are all paid for by the merchant (and I assure you that the merchant already has those things in place). I would argue that the publishers should also act as their own merchants (in addition to the existing system), but in that case the publisher receives all of the sale price. And while the individuals may be significantly more expensive, there are far fewer employees. "Keeping the formats up to date" is a position that can be eliminated if they got rid of these proprietary, DRMed options. No, no matter how you cut it, e-books should be cheaper from a cost perspective. As for what they charge, that's simply knowing the market. Jack, you are making a mistake in your costs, though. The publisher doesn’t pay for the webmaster, the pos clerk, the server farm, or the ISP; those are all paid for by the merchant (and I assure you that the merchant already has those things in place). I would argue that the publishers should also act as their own merchants (in addition to the existing system), but in that case the publisher receives all of the sale price. And while the individuals may be significantly more expensive, there are far fewer employees.

“Keeping the formats up to date” is a position that can be eliminated if they got rid of these proprietary, DRMed options.

No, no matter how you cut it, e-books should be cheaper from a cost perspective. As for what they charge, that’s simply knowing the market.

]]> By: Liviu http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012161 Liviu Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:18:24 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012161 Actually Adobe made a claim like that as reported here: http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/ebook.html Actually Adobe made a claim like that as reported here:

http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/ebook.html

]]> By: Court http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012117 Court Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:28:40 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012117 Head-shaking. My personal theory is that this is because the publishing industry, at least the Simon & Schuster end of it, has been taken over by business schoolers who can PowerPoint with the best of 'em, but have very little / no idea about literature. Therefore they fall into the same dumb traps that the music industry and, to a lesser extent, Hollywood, have fallen into. They'll lose out just as these two others have. Difference being: it's a much, much smaller pie. Which, I hope, means that in time the MBAs will abandon the sinking ship and leave it to folks who actually care about literature. For now, independents like <a href="http://www.softskull.com/" rel="nofollow">Soft Skull</a> lead the way to a more rational approach. Head-shaking. My personal theory is that this is because the publishing industry, at least the Simon & Schuster end of it, has been taken over by business schoolers who can PowerPoint with the best of ‘em, but have very little / no idea about literature. Therefore they fall into the same dumb traps that the music industry and, to a lesser extent, Hollywood, have fallen into. They’ll lose out just as these two others have. Difference being: it’s a much, much smaller pie. Which, I hope, means that in time the MBAs will abandon the sinking ship and leave it to folks who actually care about literature.

For now, independents like Soft Skull lead the way to a more rational approach.

]]> By: Jack Tingle http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012099 Jack Tingle Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:51:43 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012099 "...pay once for the creation of the content, sell an infinite number of times with no additional per-unit cost." Oh, bother. That's not really true. You might get away with arguing that the per-unit costs are lower, but they're not zero. The webmaster, the POS clerk, the guy who keeps formats up to date, the server farm, and the ISP all want to be paid. I wouldn't be surprised if the truck driver, the printer, and the warehouseman aren't cheaper. The "no returns" thing is a big savings, though. Regards, Jack Tingle “…pay once for the creation of the content, sell an infinite number of times with no additional per-unit cost.” Oh, bother.

That’s not really true. You might get away with arguing that the per-unit costs are lower, but they’re not zero. The webmaster, the POS clerk, the guy who keeps formats up to date, the server farm, and the ISP all want to be paid. I wouldn’t be surprised if the truck driver, the printer, and the warehouseman aren’t cheaper.

The “no returns” thing is a big savings, though.

Regards,
Jack Tingle

]]> By: Greg M http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012066 Greg M Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:25:37 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012066 Don't laugh about reading to your kids being criminal. There was a publisher that made that claim a few years ago, but I can't remember where. I know the Microsoft reader had (or maybe still has) a text to speech function that was disabled for all protected books. Don’t laugh about reading to your kids being criminal. There was a publisher that made that claim a few years ago, but I can’t remember where.

I know the Microsoft reader had (or maybe still has) a text to speech function that was disabled for all protected books.

]]> By: Tony http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/12/they-just-dont-get-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1012057 Tony Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:51:31 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/?p=16852#comment-1012057 QUOTE “”They don’t have the right to read a book out loud,” Aiken told the Wall Street Journal. “That’s an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law” (Fowler). endquote Damn... Does this mean that the Audio Publishing industry are going to make it a criminal offense if I actually by a Book, Paper or Electronic, and have the audacity read it out aloud to my kids. Will we have to hide under the bedcovers with a torch to read in case someones watching me. QUOTE “”They don’t have the right to read a book out loud,” Aiken told the Wall Street Journal. “That’s an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law” (Fowler). endquote

Damn… Does this mean that the Audio Publishing industry are going to make it a criminal offense if I actually by a Book, Paper or Electronic, and have the audacity read it out aloud to my kids. Will we have to hide under the bedcovers with a torch to read in case someones watching me.

]]>