interesting NYT article on "copyright morality"

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Alan

But why? A publisher's goal is to earn money. He is doing this by selling books to customers. That is his job. He would be a fool if he would let an opportunity slip away. So why are so many publishers so reluctant to publish an ebook in a timely manner? The costs are minimal - at least compared to paper books (paper, printing, proof reading, formatting, logistics).

Alan

I think it's about external pressures and how the pie shapes. For large scale adoption of e-books you need low prices and no drm and most publishers perceive this as a threat to their business model, so unless there is considerable external pressure they are not going to do much more than today (think music industry and how reluctantly and only due to plummeting sales of traditional cd's is moving toward digital content - and still fighting all the way including the recent court arguments about cd ripping).

The publishing industry is doing very well despite perceptions to the contrary, so it has no reason to change, hence high e-book prices and drm and negligible digital revenue.

The smaller specialized houses are the ones who will push toward e-books, but even there I just do not see a big market for them to more than scrape by with e-content; the big money still comes from print

There is a big cachet in being print published by a mainstream house (or genre house for that matter), so authors will not go independent unless they have no choice and they want to publish a book and for whatever reason they cannot get a contract for that (for established authors that happens when a series is not performing so publishers drop later volumes and then it's very, very hard to find another publisher to pick it up)

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

For large scale adoption of e-books you need low prices and no drm

Low price? Yes, but ebooks can be significantly cheaper in price and still generate more profit than paper books because the costs are also much lower. And I would not consider DRM a problem. Other than with music files, DRM in ebooks is very transparent and easy to use even for a novice user. Consider sites like fictionwise or mobipocket, where you can register four different e-readers. It's easy and no hassle at all.

The publishing industry is doing very well despite perceptions to the contrary, so it has no reason to change, hence high e-book prices and drm and negligible digital revenue.

Sure, because 99 % of all book sales are made with paper books. But ebooks generate much more profit because they are not significantly cheaper in price than paper books but the production costs are much lower. But on the other hand, this technology is rather new and maybe publisher are just slow to adopt and need their time to recognize new profit opportunities. Keep bugging them might help.

Alan

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

eBooks most certainly do NOT make publishers obsolete . Publishers do a heck of a lot of work from copy editing through to sales promotion, publicity, etc, which are not feasible for an individual author.

We've been down this discussion before.

As a reader, none of those things mean anything to me.

You are confusing value to the author versus value to the reader. As a reader, none of those things justify paying a publisher.

Originally Posted by HarryT

The internet makes self-publishing possible, but publishers very definitely still have a place, especially when it comes to things like textbooks, where a publisher will arrange peer-review of the material - vitally important and something which an individual author really can't do themselves.

The internet also makes alternatives to publishers for this too. Alternatives that cost far less.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Alan

And I would not consider DRM a problem. Other than with music files, DRM in ebooks is very transparent and easy to use even for a novice user.

I see you've not been bitten by DRM yet.

DRM is never transparent nor is it easy to use - especially when the system breaks (like when Mobipocket's DRM servers crash, or when a company goes out of business).

Originally Posted by Alan

Consider sites like fictionwise or mobipocket, where you can register four different e-readers. It's easy and no hassle at all.

Try reading that DRMed eBook on a reader that Mobipocket doesn't support (which is most eBook reading devices) and see how easy and hassle-free it is.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by Alan

Low price? Yes, but ebooks can be significantly cheaper in price and still generate more profit than paper books because the costs are also much lower. And I would not consider DRM a problem. Other than with music files, DRM in ebooks is very transparent and easy to use even for a novice user. Consider sites like fictionwise or mobipocket, where you can register four different e-readers. It's easy and no hassle at all.

I must take issue with the above statement. DRM is not transparent and easy to use -- at least not for a Mac user. I can't purchase a book at Sony's store. Heck, I can't even register my machine with them! If they were DRM free, they wouldn't need any interface beyond a web-browser.

Fictionwise does better. Mobipocket doesn't even have a Mac-supported reader (although they do make it possible to at least purchase books for a hand-held).

Lucky for me that my three main sources of books are all DRM-free -- Baen, Gutenberg, and Fictionwise multi-format (in that order).


Xenophon

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

We've been down this discussion before.

As a reader, none of those things mean anything to me.

You are confusing value to the author versus value to the reader. As a reader, none of those things justify paying a publisher.

The big things that a publisher gives me in the electronic world are these:

1. A filter I can trust.
2. A mechanism for getting payments to the authors.

And if you don't think that first item is important, go read the slush pile at any publisher! I guarantee that you'll need mental floss within minutes.

Xenophon

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

The big things that a publisher gives me in the electronic world are these:

1. A filter I can trust.
2. A mechanism for getting payments to the authors.

And if you don't think that first item is important, go read the slush pile at any publisher! I guarantee that you'll need mental floss within minutes.

Which can be replaced by customer reviews.

Publishers (for the most part) have a very poor record of filtering for good content.

And we don't need them to get payments to the authors. They are unnecessary middlemen for that.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

(like when Mobipocket's DRM servers crash, or when a company goes out of business).

That is correct. And that is also the reason why DRM is only easy and secure (for the customer) if bought at big companies like Amazon (Mobipocket).

Try reading that DRMed eBook on a reader that Mobipocket doesn't support (which is most eBook reading devices) and see how easy and hassle-free it is.

It won't be a problem with fictionwise, because they offer different file types. It is however a problem with mobipocket, because they only offer .prc-files. But I know that before I buy a book at mobipocket. If I won't take that chance, I buy it at fictionwise or other stores, that let me choose (and switch) between different file formats.

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Lucky for me that my three main sources of books are all DRM-free -- Baen, Gutenberg, and Fictionwise multi-format (in that order).

Sure, stores offer books that can only be used on certain devices or with certain software. They discriminate against some operating systems, hardware or software. But books always discriminate against something or someone. Books are not available in all languages. Books might not be always available everywhere. Or think about software or especially games. Most games only run on a PC, not a Mac, not a PDA, not a ... you name it.

I do not like DRM either. But so far I do not see an alternative for authors and publishers. Unprotected ebooks can be copied indefinitely. Paper books cannot. There has to be some kind of protection against unauthorized use of books. Do you have a better idea?

Alan

[tompe]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Which can be replaced by customer reviews.

Publishers (for the most part) have a very poor record of filtering for good content.

The filter is also a feedback mechanism to the author and I do not see how customer reviews could do that.

Why do you think publishers have a poor record? I think you are totally wrong and that they have a good record. A couple of exceptions is not proof of a poor record.

[deviant]

Originally Posted by Alan

I do not like DRM either. But so far I do not see an alternative for authors and publishers. Unprotected ebooks can be copied indefinitely. Paper books cannot. There has to be some kind of protection against unauthorized use of books. Do you have a better idea?

DRMed books can be ripped and copied indefinitely while at the same time providing the cracker some fun. The very idea that a completely secure system can be made without impairing the user is ridiculous.

The alternative would be to make the legal product a better alternative to the illegal one - lower price and widespread availability would be the most important here - and then perhaps appeal to the conscience of those who download illegally.

Originally Posted by Alan

The filter is also a feedback mechanism to the author and I do not see how customer reviews could do that.

Why do you think publishers have a poor record? I think you are totally wrong and that they have a good record. A couple of exceptions is not proof of a poor record.

I think that first and foremost, we'd need to put down criteria that make a "good" or "poor" record for publishers.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Alan

I do not like DRM either. But so far I do not see an alternative for authors and publishers. Unprotected ebooks can be copied indefinitely. Paper books cannot. There has to be some kind of protection against unauthorized use of books. Do you have a better idea?

Alan

Unprotected music files can be copied indefinitely and somehow the trend is for them to prevail over drm music..

The above kind of reasoning is one of the main reasons commercial e-books are such an insignificant part of the publishing industry and why I am pretty confident that until external pressures come upon it, e-books are going to stay insignificant.

For myself and I guess many book lovers, I value the most the ability to read a book whenever and wherever I want and with e-books this includes on any device of my choosing, so I will stick to non-drm, convertible-drm and print books for now.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

We've been down this discussion before.

As a reader, none of those things mean anything to me.

You are confusing value to the author versus value to the reader. As a reader, none of those things justify paying a publisher.

No, it is you who are confused. The end result of using a publisher is better quality books; that is of direct benefit to the reader. I don't want to read books full of grammatical errors and spelling mistakes, which is what we'd get "raw" from most authors.

The internet also makes alternatives to publishers for this too. Alternatives that cost far less.

I write physics textbooks. No university in the world is going to use a textbook for a course unless they know that it's been published by a reputable publisher who's subjected the information in it to a proper peer review. How is this process going to work without publishers?

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

Unprotected music files can be copied indefinitely and somehow the trend is for them to prevail over drm music..

Of course, why would somebody pay for something they could easily get for free. And so music is being copied without permission of the copyright holders and rips the music industry of a lot of revenue. So you prove exactly my point: There has to be some kind of protection against (widespread) copyright infringements.

The above kind of reasoning is one of the main reasons commercial e-books are such an insignificant part of the publishing industry and why I am pretty confident that until external pressures come upon it, e-books are going to stay insignificant.

You know the iPod? You know iTunes? They sell music legally and are making big bucks. DRM is not important as long as the price is reasonable and the handling is easy. Most DVDs are copy-protected these days. Yes, of course you can still make copies of them if you know how. The same with ebooks. I can buy secure .lit files and convert them after I have stripped them of DRM. I never tried it, but it should be fairly easy to do.

But the majority of people won't do it. People are lazy. Most won't try to break any protection on DVDs or ebooks because it involves doing some kind of work.

I live in Germany. When I go to the supermarket to buy groceries, I will find those big shopping carts in front of the supermarket. They remain there even after the market has closed. Anybody could take them easily and without problems. And those carts are expensive - a couple of hundred dollars each. But that does not happen, except for very rare occasions. Why? Those carts are being chained together. You have to put an Euro or some plastic chip into each cart to unchain them. And this is effective theft protection.

The same with DRM. Of course you can circumvent it in many ways. But most people does not even bother to try. And the majority counts. That's the point.

For myself and I guess many book lovers, I value the most the ability to read a book whenever and wherever I want and with e-books this includes on any device of my choosing, so I will stick to non-drm, convertible-drm and print books for now.

You do it, many of us here do it, too, but the majority won't. Ereaders are still some nerd gadgets. They are not widely advertised, not prominently featured in the media and are hard to find in any physical shop. They are niche products. DRM on the other hand is not an issue for most people. But it is in the music business, because there DRM protected files are much less easy to use. An exception is the iPod and iTunes. And guess what - both sell big time.

We might not like DRM (I do not). It might have some serious flaws in it (especially if the publisher is not available anymore and we got a new ereader). But I cannot see any alternative. Lower prices are fine and will attract more people to ebooks. Sure. But as long as you can get any book anywhere for free, not enough will bother to pay. Maybe digital watermarks might be an alternative. They do not prevent anybody from making illegal copies, but at least everybody will know, who was the original buyer and copyright holders can try to blame them for illegal activities. Time will tell.

Alan

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, it is you who are confused. The end result of using a publisher is better quality books; that is of direct benefit to the reader. I don't want to read books full of grammatical errors and spelling mistakes, which is what we'd get "raw" from most authors.

But that does not mean that his functionality must forever be implemented exactly as it is today.

I write physics textbooks. No university in the world is going to use a textbook for a course unless they know that it's been published by a reputable publisher who's subjected the information in it to a proper peer review. How is this process going to work without publishers?

The peer review can be implemented in other ways. For example there is a movement for academic papers to try to publish first (electronically) and peer review afterwards.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tompe

But that does not mean that his functionality must forever be implemented exactly as it is today.

Certainly; I'm not disputing that. I'm disageeing with Lauzon's claim that a publisher adds no value to the book for the reader. That value could certainly be added by other means, I agree, but at the moment it is undeniably added by the publisher.

The peer review can be implemented in other ways. For example there is a movement for academic papers to try to publish first (electronically) and peer review afterwards.

Would you trust a textbook that hadn't been peer reviewed? I wouldn't!