Macmillan becoming library friendly

[Kumabjorn]

According to an article on Ars Technica Macmillan will provide libraries with e-books for $25 s piece, license express after 52 loans.
I'm on my Galaxy Tab 2 and I haven't figured out how to copy URL from Flipboard yet.

[fjtorres]

It is a pilot program with a limited list of ebooks for rental.
And it *is* rent, not sale: the licenses expire after two years or 52 check-outs, whichever comes first.
Which, price or not, makes it pretty darn library-hostile; the libraries pay more if the book is popular and lose their rental fee if it isn't.

The Digital reader blog has a report on it:
http://www.the-digital-reader.com/20...t-this-spring/

[Kumabjorn]

Want Macmillan one of the publishers who refused to sell to libraries before?

[fjtorres]

Yup. They refused to take libraries' money on any terms.
Now they'll take it on *their* terms.
Remains to be seen if libraries take the deal or leave it.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Remains to be seen if libraries take the deal or leave it.

If they're smart, they'll leave it.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Remains to be seen if libraries take the deal or leave it.

If they're smart, they'll leave it.

[Anabana]

They (Macmillan) aren't trying to make 'amends' from the goodness of their hearts...
They must be seeing potential sales lost.
So, it appears that it would behoove those of us who regularly make use of our library (ies), to advise them NOT to cave in to Macmillan. I will, in any case.

[Kumabjorn]

Sometimes you guys just make me completely confused. On the one hand you complain that there aren't enough e-books available in libraries and then when a large publisher say they will make their titles available you complain about that. As a comedian would say: "Tough crowd"!

[Canuck_in_Japan]

There are tons of books in my local library which are much older than 2 years. What gives MacMillan the right to limit libraries' ownership to only two years? If I was a library I'd tell them to go to hell.

[Ripplinger]

I also hope that libraries do not give in and take this deal. It could set a bad precedent that could effect all libraries and other publishers down the road.

The terms are just ridiculous. Libraries aren't rolling in money to be able to afford these high-priced terms for ebooks. Compare that policy to if they purchased the hardcover book. They pay one price and they have it forever to loan out to as many people that want to read it... no limits, no one comes into the library after 2 years to remove the books, it's there to stay.

It's not a case of being a tough crowd. I don't want to see any of my public libraries close down because they run out of money on silly pricing like this and are forced into cutbacks. It's a case of greedy publishers trying to squeeze more money any way they can. Trying to get it from libraries just offends me.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Sometimes you guys just make me completely confused. On the one hand you complain that there aren't enough e-books available in libraries and then when a large publisher say they will make their titles available you complain about that. As a comedian would say: "Tough crowd"!

Personally, I'd rather my libraries never buy from the Big Six. These publishers are gouging libraries with their outrageous pricing and restrictions. Libraries have precious few dollars to spend and it's a waste of tax dollars to throw these funds at high priced books. That money is best spent on other services.

[Kumabjorn]

I get the impression that library lenders in the US aren't primarily interested in reading popular books, is that the case? Here in Sweden there is a clear bias towards the big publishers. I assumed people would be happy that they gained access to one of the big publisher's backlist through the library system. Seems like I was completely off base.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I get the impression that library lenders in the US aren't primarily interested in reading popular books, is that the case? Here in Sweden there is a clear bias towards the big publishers. I assumed people would be happy that they gained access to one of the big publisher's backlist through the library system. Seems like I was completely off base.

I'm sure they do want the best sellers; but if the price is too high, who's going to pay for them?

[Apache]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

There are tons of books in my local library which are much older than 2 years. What gives MacMillan the right to limit libraries' ownership to only two years? If I was a library I'd tell them to go to hell.

A lot less than two years if the book is the least bit popular. A popular book could last only a year.
Apache

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

If they're smart, they'll leave it.

I hear ya.
I hear ya.