What’s the greater fear for publishers? Amazon or piracy?

[stonetools]

Mike Shatzkin weighs in on Pottermore and what options it now creates for the publishing industry.

LINK
The nub:

Without DRM, as Berlucchi explained, anybody can sell ebooks that can be read on a Kindle. Once Pottermore decided they could live without DRM, they faced Amazon with a very difficult choice. The ebooks were going to go on Kindle devices whether Amazon wanted them there or not. Either they could ignore them or they could play along. I am sure the “play along” deal includes compensation to Amazon for the sales they refer (as it does B&N and, according to a quote from Redmayne, other distribution relations and affiliations will be enabled going forward.)

In other words, in a refreshing change from recent history, the content owner was able to present Amazon with a “take it or leave it” proposition. They decided to “take it”. They were wise. The game was changing either way.

The $64 million question is how the Big Six executives and strategists are viewing these developments. There is no author in the world with the power of J.K. Rowling to do this; she’s the Beatles. But, how about a big publisher? What would happen if Random House or HarperCollins (or one or more of the other four) told Amazon, “we’re taking off the DRM and we’re going to serve all our ebooks ourselves; you’re welcome to continue to sell our books on a referral basis”?

Could this work? I know the anti DRMists would be cheering on any Big 6 publisher if they tried this, but it would be a big risk. In the comments, Shatzkin details what a publisher would have to do:

Let's first see whether any of the Big Six a) has the guts to sell without DRM, b) can persuade all the agents for the authors they represent that it is okay, and c) can build a platform that will really work and then d) can make the right deal with Amazon. Or maybe Bookish can become a factor.

Every one of these is a tough ask, and Amazon won't be sitting still for this, either.
What do you all think?

[DiapDealer]

What’s the greater fear for publishers? Amazon or piracy?

Do you walk to school or pack your lunch?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Could this work? I know the anti DRMists would be cheering on any Big 6 publisher if they tried this, but it would be a big risk. In the comments, Shatzkin details what a publisher would have to do:

It's perhaps worth pointing out that if you link your Pottermore account to Amazon, and download from Amazon's servers, the book DOES have DRM. It's only if you download direct from Pottermore that it doesn't.

[ProfCrash]

As I understand it, the Publishers are the ones insisting on DRM. You can sell e-books without DRM on Amazon, many authors do. There are even a few authors who are large enough to insist that their books were sold without DRM.

I doubt that the Big 6 would go the non-DRM route since they are the ones demanding it.

[fjtorres]

DRM is something of a religious article of faith with publishers and a lot of authors.
Amazon is more of a handy-dandy boogie man.

I doubt they really fear anybody or anything this side of the trustbusters.

[Shack70]

THe problem isn't piracy. DRM doesn't stop piracy, it makes people pay for the same item over and over to use it on multiple devices. It locks users into a device and makes it hard for them to change to another one.

Bottom line is why pay Amazon or B&N a portion of the sales when you don't need them? Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead did it with the music industry, now it's being done on Pottermore with ebooks.

[rhadin]

One more thing that needs to be considered: price. Personally, with or without DRM -- doesn't matter -- I'm not willing to pay $13 for a novel.

[charmian]

Judging from their actions, I'd say it's obviously piracy.

[euterpe]

If proprietary ebooks were without DRM you might as well just hand the things out.

Get real.

[piperclassique]

If proprietary ebooks were without DRM you might as well just hand the things out.

Get real.

Except you are wrong, of course. Pirates can hack DRM no problem. All it does is stop honest folk reading on their chosen device. Baen books seem to manage just fine without DRM. Get real.

[Synamon]

All those people buying the Harry Potter books without DRM must be a figment of my imagination, since they can't be real.

[crossi]

Originally Posted by euterpe

If proprietary ebooks were without DRM you might as well just hand the things out.

Get real.

Baen Books & O'Reilly Publishing (technical books) sell their ebooks without DRM. As does Pottermore. DRM costs the publisher money, limits their customer base and annoys their customers. It also is useless at stopping piracy.

[euterpe]

Well, didn't mean to come across as rude but I guess I did. Also, judging by the the theme of many of these discussions (i.e. why do books cost money, we're oppressed by amazon etc) I'm really not going to win any friends.

Before I discovered these threads I was lurking on Amazon where I noticed the same complaint -- the idea that because ebooks aren't tangible they can't possibly be worth the same as if they were bought in the store. Or, the other half of people who think they have been robbed of some inalienable right to use their ebook on more than 5 devices.

Both are pretty hypocritical in this weird twisted bout of logic -- everyone complaining bought the ereader, or the bookshelf so-to-speak and seems to prefer the ebook product over an ole gutenberg-style any day of the week.

If an ebook then is clearly the superior good, why then is a higher/closer to MSRP price not justified, and furthermore, the publishers concern of its easily mass distributable properties?

Thanks I welcome me to these forums too

-- Euterpe

[piper28]

Originally Posted by Shack70

Bottom line is why pay Amazon or B&N a portion of the sales when you don't need them? Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead did it with the music industry, now it's being done on Pottermore with ebooks.

I just don't see people willing to go to lots of different sites to find the books they want. First, they'd have to figure out which publisher carries the book, then go to that site, give yet another company your credit card info, and buy the book, and hope it's served in a manner that's easy for you to get it to your reader of choice. Obviously, it's working for Harry Potter, but I think that's kinda an exception. Even just increasing the number of sites to match the number of publishers, you're suddenly increasing the complexity. And god forbid if it went to the author level. The average person out there is lazy, if you make it too hard on them, they're going to stop reading, not jump through the hoops.

[Shack70]

Originally Posted by euterpe

If an ebook then is clearly the superior good, why then is a higher/closer to MSRP price not justified, and furthermore, the publishers concern of its easily mass distributable properties?

Thanks I welcome me to these forums too

-- Euterpe

People think ebooks should be cheaper because some of the cost of making a paper book is missing. No paper, no warehouse to store the books, no brick and mortar store to sell it at, and they make one copy and distribute it vs. thousands of copies.