E-books one of the biggest technology flops?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by alex_d

Without napster, a hard drive mp3 player would have had no reason to exist. Zero.

I, for one, have never bought music off of Napster (and, for that matter, only 3 songs off of iTunes). 99% of the music on my MP3 player comes from my already-owned collection of CDs and ALBUMS, which are already filled with my favorite music, jazz. There's plenty of old music that hasn't been put on CD yet, including a lot of classic jazz. An MP3 player allows me to bring it with me on my motorcycle, walking to work, or exercizing.

Napster never had much of a draw for people who didn't listen to rock. But the rest of us could still appreciate MP3 technology, and take advantage of it. (and, for that matter, only 3 songs off of iTunes)

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by alex_d

There are only two schemes that could work. Two schemes that would give the sort of limitless, zero-marginal-cost access to content that would make iPods and eBooks work. Either monthly subscriptions (which haven't took off mostly due to half-hearted marketing) or government-funded mandatory licensing (sounds commie but translates to digital libraries. it even has a benefit of reducing commercialism and promoting quality).

Subscription plans are okay... as long as you can keep your content once the subscription lapses. If I let my Scientific American paper magazine subscription lapse, my last five years of SA aren't going to spontaneously combust on my shelf. If you lose the material with the subscription, that's not a subscription... that's a lease.

Government-funded mandatory licensing (of what? The books? The readers?) will not work internationally, will only hand commercialism over to Big Business, and will put quality control in the hands of the government. Right.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by alex_d

Without napster, a hard drive mp3 player would have had no reason to exist. Zero.

Without thousands of songs from napster, no one would even want to listen to music for hours each day!

Anyone who's bought an iPod now and gets all their songs from itunes/ripped cds is a poser (bought it just cuz everyone else did) and is not enjoying their iPod.

...

If ebook readers become popular now, it will similarly be because of file sharing. If ebooks have not become popular it is not because 'drm strangled them,' it's because people don't know where to get bountiful, free content.

...

If you look at the arstechnica article, all the plotpoints are "estimates." The one that isn't, for 2005, actually shows a RISE in revenue. The industry has an incentive to make its outlook look grim and pitiful so that it could have an excuse to press measures that would get it more money....

I'm sorry alex_d, but I'm confused. I'm not trying to argue with you, but you seem to be saying that nobody pays for music (except, presumably, for those who pay for a single copy and post it on the web for everyone else to not pay for,), and that the music industry is making more money than they were before all this not paying for music started happening....

It seems to me that if nobody much pays for music, that the music industry wouldn't make more money from that scenario, and if the music industry is, making more money, then someone must be paying for what they're selling....

Like I said, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but that just doesn't make sense to me.

Personally, I think it's more likely that a lot (okay, a lotta lots) of folks are sampling the dubiously free content, but then subsequently paying for content from artists they like (both from honesty, and from a desire to see more offerings from those artists). That would seem to better explain both the widespread file 'sharing' phenomenon and the rise in music revenues.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Personally, I think it's more likely that a lot (okay, a lotta lots) of folks are sampling the dubiously free content, but then subsequently paying for content from artists they like (both from honesty, and from a desire to see more offerings from those artists). That would seem to better explain both the widespread file 'sharing' phenomenon and the rise in music revenues.

I'd agree there... traditionally, that's the natural result of sharing, whether it's music, movies, or books. It's the act of spreading the word that gets people out to the stores, to buy that artist they just discovered (the business model of radio, and the business benefit end of the public library system). The more sharing, the more people discover an artist, and go buy their works.

That's a major reason why DRM works against the proliferation of e-books, and for that matter, books in general. When you can't share, you can't turn on new readers, and they don't buy books.

[RWood]

I have about 2 TB of storage on my music server filled from my CDs and Lp albums that I have transcribed over the years. Many of the albums were never issued in CD form. Some of the 78 rpm records I have transcribed were never even issued in 33-1/3 rpm or 45 rpm formats. This is what fills my Creative mp3 player. This is what I listen to while I type this response. Sure there were many long nights tagging the files and some of those I have never listened to. They are there for that day when I want to listen to them. I have boxes of DVD backups stored off-site to ensure that I don't have to do all of that again.

Was it worth it? Yes!

It is mostly a matter of what each person wants. Those of us currently at MobileRead seem to be the ones that will take the time to work at their content. The average consumer just wants it simple and easy to use. Will eBooks get there? Yes, but not soon. Music required a standard format (mp3) as did video (vhs over betamax.)

Sharing, bootlegging, or piracy if you care to call it by those names are just noise that obscure the real problem of old established businesses that are resisting any change to their traditional business models in light of the technology advances. Rather than endorse them and lead the market they are doing all they can to keep the new technologies from being used to their fullest. Under the banner of "trusted platform" the new CPUs and operating systems such as Vista are large DRM schemes that provide others with control of your computer to say what you may and may not do with it but cannot keep your kids from hard core porn for that would not be "right."

The economics have shifted and the old business models will soon be in the trash heap of history. Where was the outcry of the buggy whip manufacturers when the automobile started to become popular? How many spoke out for the poor blacksmiths when the demand for horse shoes declined? Why are we hearing now about the poor publishers with their warehouses full of dead trees? Have we all become professional victims?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by RWood

I have about 2 TB of storage on my music server filled from my CDs and Lp albums that I have transcribed over the years.

2 TB? #!&#*!@&!!

Originally Posted by RWood

How many spoke out for the poor blacksmiths when the demand for horse shoes declined?

No one had to. The blacksmiths went to work manning the great iron and steel machines in the factories, joining everyone else in riding the wave of the future. (Take note, publishers.)

[alex_d]

Subscription plans are okay... as long as you can keep your content once the subscription lapses. If I let my Scientific American paper magazine subscription lapse, my last five years of SA aren't going to spontaneously combust on my shelf. If you lose the material with the subscription, that's not a subscription... that's a lease.

First thing i'd like to say is that when it comes to reading, I don't understand why anyone would want to hold on to the stuff for very long. Especially SA. You read it, you've read it, you read something else.

Music, of course, is much different. Now i'm not saying subscriptions (and by definition the content has to expire) are the perfect solution. But when you compare having to pay every time you'd like to hear a song to see if you'd like it or having to pay HUGE sums just to have a large variety of music to listen to versus being tied to forever pay some sum a month but not having any hesitation, regret, or limits... then I really think subscriptions are the lesser of two evils.

The one problem with subscriptions, however, is the larger picture. If all music companies get everyone to go and buy subscriptions, why the hell would they release new music? Because of that unfortunate result, I'll reverse myself and say subscriptions are very bad. But indirectly.

Government-funded mandatory licensing (of what? The books? The readers?) will not work internationally, will only hand commercialism over to Big Business, and will put quality control in the hands of the government. Right.

Yes, of books (and of music). I have no idea what you mean when you say "handing commercialism over to Big Business." Of course, it's possible a corrupt government will destroy the system. But realize that we already have a system, the libraries, which work very well. (There also exist many other government institutions which fund the creation of intellectual property, like those funding art (eg PBS, NPR) or which spend hundreds of billions of dollars on scientific research (eg NIH, NSF).) Seems to me they work very, very well, and I think the government can be expected to continue making such decisions responsibly. Some people who think government can't be trusted for anything don't seem to ever try to look at the real world.

But even a simple fallback plan of compensating the author on a flat rate relative to his popularity will work very well too.

[alex_d]

But you know what? Forget everything I just said. (About subscriptions, governments, etc.)


In the end, I think a market-based approach would probably work best. But what is a market based approach? NO, IT DOESN'T F**KING MEAN LETTING EVERYONE DO WHATEVER THE F**K THEY WANT. As Adam Smith pointed out in the very first book to present the principles of capitalism, a market economy is one ruled by competition. A phenomenon which steers individual players so beautifully and benevolently that he likened it to an animate being, an invisible hand.

What he forgot to mention is that it is also in every player's interest to destroy competition. And the _free market left to its own devices will do just that. With mergers, oligopolies, cartels, and price-fixing.

We've remedied that a tiny bit with antitrust laws, but if we go further and just split up the big 4 music publishers and the similar cartel of book publishers into a hundred smaller firms we will restore the invisible hand and create a true market system. With all its benefits. Prices will plummet, quality will rise, and we would not be hearing a single mention of DRM or ridiculous figures such as having to pay $10,000 to fill an iPod.

I would not have to argue for any alternatives to just buying content piece by piece.

And because individual publishers won't have so much power (in marketing, sales channels, etc.), authors will end up getting bigger cuts and make plenty of money.

Competition, not laissez-faire, is the nature and cause of the wealth of nations.

BREAK UP THE HUGE PUBLISHERS INTO SMALL COMPANIES.

Under the banner of "trusted platform" the new CPUs and operating systems such as Vista are large DRM schemes that provide others with control of your computer to say what you may and may not do with it but cannot keep your kids from hard core porn for that would not be "right."

That's because pornographers don't use DRM. You know why? Because there are so many of them that there is an incredible amount of competition. This competition drives down prices to such an extent that so much content is given away as freebies that many people can get by just fine with neither paying nor stealing. And the quality of this free (or cheap) content is FAR higher than that of the content that gets sold through the older channels (eg PPV or DVD) which haven't yet been influenced as much by competition.

Competition is incredibly powerful. Of course you don't need to tell any economist that. What you do have to do is get it through their thick skulls how little true competition exists in the present markets. (They've been in denial about it for hundreds of years because assuming prevalent competition means vastly simplifying economic theories. They're too fond of competition's elegance to dare think that's not actually the way the world works.)

The solution, however, is straightforward. Force competition manually. (And simply braking up large companies is one strategy.)

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by alex_d

First thing i'd like to say is that when it comes to reading, I don't understand why anyone would want to hold on to the stuff for very long. Especially SA. You read it, you've read it, you read something else.

Because some material is so good, that you want to read it again and again and again. Many years ago, I used to re-read the Lord of the Rings at least once a year - and every time I read it, I discovered something different.

You are correct about magazines, though. They tend to be timely and age very quickly. Specialty technical magazines may be an exception, though.

Originally Posted by alex_d

Music, of course, is much different. Now i'm not saying subscriptions (and by definition the content has to expire) are the perfect solution.

Subscriptions are not even a very good solution. Subscriptions are good for the consumer only if new, good content is being created regularly. Otherwise, your subscription is a really good value only while you are grabbing the old, good content.

And we've all seen how good the entertainment industry is at creating new, good content.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by alex_d

BREAK UP THE HUGE PUBLISHERS INTO SMALL COMPANIES.

I would argue that this is happening already.

I'll point to Scott Siegler's recent Ancestor book release. No big publisher would take it, so he went to a smaller press. Now, the demand basically buried that small press, but think that the small press likes that kind of problem.

With eBooks, publishers become irrelevant. They exist today because they make it economic for the average person to purchase a book. The costs of creating and distributing an eBook are effectively $0, so for eBooks they are no longer needed.

Effectively, the author becomes his own publisher when it comes to eBooks.

Originally Posted by alex_d

The solution, however, is straightforward. Force competition manually. (And simply braking up large companies is one strategy.)

As we've seen with the movie industry, economic forces will make this happen without the need for the gov't to step in (in the case of the movie industry, by the time the gov't got involved, the film cartel created by Edison was effectively broken).

What needs to happen is for the gov't to get its nose OUT. They need to stop passing laws that promote the status quo (like the DMCA and extensions to Copyright length). Competition can only exist when it's not locked down by stupid laws.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Heh. I would have joined this discussion yesterday, but the Noreaster took out my internet connection. Then the dog ate my homework. But thanks to rlauzon, I don't have much to add to yesterday's debate.

But I will say this: It may be that only one thing is holding e-books back from finally starting down the same path blazed by the online music industry... one common format.

A single e-book format, readable in its entirety or in selected parts by any and all readers (hardware and software) would go a long way towards consolidating the e-book market, cutting waste based on competing standards, creating fair competition, standardizing prices, eliminating DRM, de-confusing the public, and levelling all playing fields.

Overall acceptance of the MP3 format did all this for music. I believe overall acceptance of a similar e-book format (at most, two... one including multimedia content, one just text and images) will start the e-book industry down the same road.

[Blue Tyson]

The music industry also ignores probability. You just aren't going to have hugely increasing profits all the time. You might like that to be the case, but it certainly isn't going to happen.