looks like advertising piracy?

[Chi Cygni]

Just throwing it out there. If I was new to ebooks I would actually be tempted to go to the dark side (meaning just got ereader for xmas and think, hey it is easy!) What exactly IS the point of this article? Thousands? Really? Amazon sales endangered?
If I don't get it please be kind (disregard) as
1. I'm blonde
2. with a pounding headache right now
3. lurking at night pretending I don't have to go to work tomorrow after 2 weeks break.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ee-eBooks.html

on a side note I don't mean another "but the ebook prices are so high" etc

/end rant

[sabredog]

Possibly. But I reckon it simply shows the issues often presented on Mobileread.

The publishers keep ripping off their customer base, not making changes to their business model to better suit the digital age.

They price fix, geo restrict, make up statistics in an attempt to show they are losing billions of dollars and treat customers with utter disdain.

They do all this and wonder why casual piracy is on the rise?

[fjtorres]

Reminds me of the Carnoy article bemoaning the piracy of his book that, incidentally, told everybody exactly which torrent file to search for to get 2500 pirated commercial ebooks.

BTW, anybody check the rants in the comments sections?
Blasting amazon for selling ebooks-which-aren't-real-books, for *not* selling UK ebooks to other regions, for not supporting the blessed epub, for just existing...
And those where just the first four.
Then they turn on each other.
Piracy is theft, no it isn't--it's the greedy colluding publishers--no; it's the vat's fault...

Reminds me of a certain gaming site's freefire zone.
Lots of emotion, not much insight.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by sabredog

They do all this and wonder why casual piracy is on the rise?

Not that I disagree with your premise, but the web sites the article refers to are for-profit piracy sites. Nothing casual about *their* unathorized distribution.

There's "pirates", "pirates", and "pirates" and those guys are closer to the original "land pirates" of centuries past than the Napster age "everybody is doing it" casual file sharers.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by sabredog

Possibly. But I reckon it simply shows the issues often presented on Mobileread.

The publishers keep ripping off their customer base, not making changes to their business model to better suit the digital age.

They price fix, geo restrict, make up statistics in an attempt to show they are losing billions of dollars and treat customers with utter disdain.

They do all this and wonder why casual piracy is on the rise?

Is it really on the rise, or are more people choosing indy authors (As has happened to some extent with the continuing rise of Indy music)?

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by Phogg

Is it really on the rise, or are more people choosing indy authors (As has happened to some extent with the continuing rise of Indy music)?

That could be true as well. I buy far more indie author works than I do agency releases now.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Chi Cygni

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ee-eBooks.html

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

[Chi Cygni]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

I know. DM didn't blame them because it probably assumes they cannot read.

[Villordsutch]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

S'very true. I'm still waiting for DM to tell the world e-ink may have cancer implications.

[carpetmojo]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Not that I disagree with your premise, but the web sites the article refers to are for-profit piracy sites. Nothing casual about *their* unathorized distribution.

There's "pirates", "pirates", and "pirates" and those guys are closer to the original "land pirates" of centuries past than the Napster age "everybody is doing it" casual file sharers.

Right and it also points out that the pirated ebooks are being made available
before the official (DRM infected) versions are even released. So, not in any
way a result of the "casual" pirating that DRM is claimed to prevent.

Luck;
Ken

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

If I had read this 3 seconds earlier, I'd be busy cleaning my monitor and finding a new keyboard.

Kudos to you.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

Right and it also points out that the pirated ebooks are being made available
before the official (DRM infected) versions are even released. So, not in any
way a result of the "casual" pirating that DRM is claimed to prevent.

Luck;
Ken

Do they mean things like Harry Potter that have been out in realbook for years, or do they mean pre-release / advance reader copies that have been leaked? One could be fixed by not witholding the ebook version for whatever reason they think it should be witheld, the other could be fixed by adding something that would uniquely identify the source but not be obvious to anyone reading it. Like having a minor character with a different name or wearing a different colour socks.

[Elfwreck]

From the article: It is estimated that up to 20 per cent of eBook downloads are from pirate sites.

Only 20%? Pfft. Then we really *don't* have a piracy problem. If Stross was right when he said that 75% of readers never contributed to the author's income stream--were fans who'd borrowed books or bought them secondhand or read them from libraries--and ebooks are 80% paid for (or maybe a bit less, because "emailed to a friend" is not downloaded to pirate sites, but I believe we can safely say those are a lot less than the number downloaded from sites), there is *no* loss from "piracy."

Of course, they didn't quote anything like a source for that statistic, so I assume it's from the same place that insists that a single case of infringement should be worth more in damages than the income of the entire history of the recording industry.

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Given the news source, the only surprise is they didn't blame it all on immigrant single mothers on benefits.

Originally Posted by Villordsutch

S'very true. I'm still waiting for DM to tell the world e-ink may have cancer implications.

The thing is, you both know these articles will feature in it at some point.....