"The book industry is gonna get Napstered..."

[K-Thom]

You can also (as I found it the hard way ) overwrite it with a file of the same name, thus deleting the original file.

I didn't consider that option. Honestly a heartfelt "thank you"!

[HarryT]

It's just an FTP upload directory, so if you upload a file with the same name as one that's already there, it overwrites it.

[klikklak]

My take is a bit different, I think capitalism as a whole might be struggling with the digital age. And the answer, SURPRISE, would be socialism. Can't really argue with free income and livelyhood with access to all the culture of the world. I know someone will point out that USSR was a big failure, which it was, but I'm libertarian left so I think we could do better. Second part where capitalism is struggling/failing is ecology, but that's an another rant.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by klikklak

My take is a bit different, I think capitalism as a whole might be struggling with the digital age. And the answer, SURPRISE, would be socialism. Can't really argue with free income and livelyhood with access to all the culture of the world. I know someone will point out that USSR was a big failure, which it was, but I'm libertarian left so I think we could do better. Second part where capitalism is struggling/failing is ecology, but that's an another rant.

I would guess, that had the Soviets taken oven Finland, you might feel differently about socialism...

I am also puzzled how you connected the "digital age" with "free income and livelihood?"

[klikklak]

@sonist, well the connection is because people are worried that creative works wouldn't be compensated in any way, thus making writers unemployed. But if they'd be paid not in relation to sales, but in relation to being members of a municipality/community, there would be more people who would be able to spend time on writing and other creative tasks. So basically automation is good if it's put into use by social progress and bad if people are demanded to make money by working, but not being given the opportunity to actually do it.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by klikklak

@sonist, well the connection is because people are worried that creative works wouldn't be compensated in any way, thus making writers unemployed. But if they'd be paid not in relation to sales, but in relation to being members of a municipality/community, there would be more people who would be able to spend time on writing and other creative tasks....

Hm, so a lazy red Orangutan like me, can be sitting on his atrophied tail, scribbling gibberish from time to time, and get the same beer money as JK Rowling.... Hey, me likes

In reality, I'd guess some authors will still make a living in this digital economy, and some won't. Just like it's always been.

[klikklak]

Yeah, you might be right, but I'll still say two more things. First, capitalism is three centuries old, before that we had a mixed economy (artisans, guilds, peasantry and the main status was owning land as gentry) and second, books are only the latest (sort of) thing to have computerized reproduction. This trend will continue to production in coming years with things like 3d printers becoming usable. So really, where information can be copied with no cost and material and production costs are minimal, where do we go to work to get money? .. of course you could be right that "some won't" make a living, but I'd rather not get all gloomy about this.

[Jaime_Astorga]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

The Napster of books is already here, it's called the ebooksbay. Fully searchable, indexes torrents and pdf giveaways etc. It's been around for awhile too Some of these 'tech' journalists really need to do some research.

I prefer 4shared, personally. It's kind of like rapidshare, except it doesn't suck.

I am also puzzled how you connected the "digital age" with "free income and livelihood?"

I think the basic idea for this kind of argument is that technological progress tends to lessen labor for people. With machines, people don't have to work as physically hard. With good agricultural technology, people don't have to work all the time just to feed themselves. Eventually, we might get stuff like robots to do labor and 3d printers to make material goods (like those replicator things in Star Trek).

As more things become "free," people would have to work less hard to earn a living (for example, if content and programs were available online freely, people wouldn't have the extra expense of buying them and could work less hours to pay for their expenses); though presumably a good deal of people would still work pretty much to buy all sorts of advertisement fueled consumerist goods and luxuries.

[dmikov]

Originally Posted by Jaime_Astorga

I prefer 4shared, personally. It's kind of like rapidshare, except it doesn't suck.


I think the basic idea for this kind of argument is that technological progress tends to lessen labor for people. With machines, people don't have to work as physically hard. With good agricultural technology, people don't have to work all the time just to feed themselves. Eventually, we might get stuff like robots to do labor and 3d printers to make material goods (like those replicator things in Star Trek).

As more things become "free," people would have to work less hard to earn a living (for example, if content and programs were available online freely, people wouldn't have the extra expense of buying them and could work less hours to pay for their expenses); though presumably a good deal of people would still work pretty much to buy all sorts of advertisement fueled consumerist goods and luxuries.

Sadly true, those Bear diamonds that most blonds demand will still be expensive.

[SolRaven]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Nah, there will still be sales. It may only be the "click here to donate" type of sale, but that's still income.

Think people won't pay for what's available for free? Look at the bottled water industry. They'll pay for convenient packaging (which, in the case of ebooks, may mean "nice format" and/or "download from a site I already visit") and sometimes from brand loyalty.

I agree. I have always been willing to pay for quality, service and appreciation. I have an entire cd music collection and have gone to many concerts of a band I was turned onto by Napster back in the day. Had they not been on Napster, I doubt I ever would've have purchased a CD since I couldn't hear it first.

If you offer a free crappy version, but a pay for upgraded version, it will sell, and sell well. How do you think drug dealers do it? They offer a free sample to kids, then get them hooked for life. Please don't tell me drug dealers are more intelligent than the educated reader, I don't think I could take it!

[djgreedo]

The power has shifted. There is no scarcity of products, and therefore they have no 'value'. One ebook can be copied enough times for everybody in the world to have a copy with negligible cost - a game changer.

We need to separate the morality and emotional issues from the facts. Were there similar concerns when Gutenberg invented the printing press? (and if you want to read an awesom novella about how it happened, read Mister B Gone by Clive Barker, but read a paper copy).

Authors and publishers need to work out a way to make money from their products in the digital age, but it will not compare to the way they make money now, no matter how hard they try. This may include the death of the novel in its current form.

Some great ideas have already been mentioned, and I'm sure authors will use their creativity to work out how to get our money

For example:
value-added items - products made of atoms as Moejoe puts it.
releasing books in small chunks - don't release part 2 until part 1 has made $X, release self-contained short stories for $1 (I think 'microtransactions' are the way of the future for e-commerce)
work on donations - the honour system
total free-for-all with ISPs charging for digital content per MB and transferring % to artists organisations who distribute it to artists
subscription models - pay $20 a year and get a guaranteed number of books/blog updates/emails from your favourite author plus a signed t-shirt or special fan club gift

But as for charging $20 for a digital copy of a book - forget about it. It may not be what authors or publishers want to hear, but people are not going to pay for what they can get for free with less DRM restrictions.

And it may mean that writers make a lot less money. It may lead to lower quality overall (as writers will need to produce more quantity and publishers can't afford copy editing, etc.).

The industry is going to change, but that change will be dictated by technological possibilities and the desires of consumers - not by authors and publishers.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by djgreedo

But as for charging $20 for a digital copy of a book - forget about it. It may not be what authors or publishers want to hear, but people are not going to pay for what they can get for free with less DRM restrictions.

I think that you have a very cynical view of people, I'm afraid. The overwhelming majority of people (in my experience) are honest; if something is too expensive they will not buy it; it's only the small minority of dishonest people who will try to take it without paying for it.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by djgreedo

The industry is going to change, but that change will be dictated by technological possibilities and the desires of consumers - not by authors and publishers.

So only a few authors will put a lot of work into writing books, and little worth reading will be out there. What a brave new world! Is that what we consumers want? I don't mind paying a reasonable price to encourage people to create what I want. Good work should be rewarded, for any product.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's exactly what sites like Mobipocket do. Anyone can sign up with them and upload their books. You may, of course, not consider the 35% of list price that they pay you to be "reasonable", but they do do a lot for you, including offering the book for sale via dozens of resellers. I consider it a pretty fair deal, personally.

35% isn't a fair deal. Let me explain why.

I publish a small number of paper books (I couldn't persuade the rights holders to go for ebooks).

"Desbarollda, The Waltzing Mouse" is a print-on-demand book, printed by Lightning Source, sold by Amazon. (UK link and US Link for those interested)

The list price is £5.99. The split of that price is:

20% (£1.20) to Amazon for ordering from LS, storing and handling, collecting payment, customer services, etc.
30% (£1.78) to Lightning Source for printing.
50% (£3.01) to me, out of which I try to cover my origination costs and pay the rights holders.

If I did get permission to make it into an ebook, and set the SAME list price (a bad idea IMO), the price split would be:

65% (£3.89) to Amazon for the same as for the paperbook, less the physical storage and handling, but plus some server space and bandwidth
35% (£2.10) to me.

How can Amazon possibly justify charging over three times as much for 'handling' an ebook as for a pbook? It just doesn't make sense.

Now, if Amazon only charged the same 20%, I could set a list price of £3.75 for the ebook and still make the same profit per copy.

Amazon's terms for small publishers and ebooks are a complete rip-off.

[HarryT]

If you feel that it's not a good deal then of course your choice is clear - don't go for it.

For many, however, the large number of retailers that uploading to Mobi will let your book reach, and the hassle of setting up your own website, handling payment, etc, will make it worthwhile.

It's a service that's available. Nobody is under an obligation to use it if they prefer to sell their books through other channels.