Random House's new library pricing increase revealed

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Why not? We have FRAND for patents, why not make something for the other types of IP?

FRAND isn't a law, it is something imposed by standards organisations.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by elemenoP

If libraries boycott Random House, what books are they going to acquire for their ebook collections??? Isn't Random House the last of the majors to even SELL to libraries? Selling at inflated prices is vastly better than not selling to libraries at all. Is it better than a 26-checkout limit on the license? I dunno. Discuss.

Indie, small publishers, new authors who want exposure, public domain, etc.

Buying at inflated prices is worse than not buying at all.

All I can say is that if libraries won't boycott Random House over this, then they deserve to be taken to the cleaners; and I hope RH raises its prices even higher.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by ucfgrad93

What is next? If they are regulating ebook prices, why not ebook readers? Where does it stop? The government should not be in the practice of regulating prices.

I agree that the government shouldn't regulate prices but they've already broken the free market system by granting these companies a copyright monopoly. I think the appropriate response is to shorten the copyright.

I personally don't believe that libraries have to lend new fiction books fulfill their purpose. If copyright was shorten to say 14 years then they could lend all the 14 year fiction books they want with no Overdrive required.

[xg4bx]

publishers don't give a turkey that its tax money buying these books, they want every red cent they think they're entitled to, decency be damned.

libraries should simply cease doing business with them. if they want to play hardball so be it. if you have your heart set on a random house best seller just wait and pick it up for a dime when/if the library holds a book sale. i'm sure there are plenty of indies and small presses who would give their first born for library shelving.

the only way these companies will get it is when they're hit in the wallet and lose their massive revenues brought in from sales to libraries.

[Kali Yuga]

I'm not crazy about the drastic increase in prices, but the actually do have a point -- namely this is a perpetual license to the library. The subsequent responsibility is for RH to honor the license into perpetuity.

I'd also say that it's not really the publisher's problem if citizens can't be bothered to adequately fund public libraries. I would agree that book purchases shouldn't take a significantly higher percentage of library funding than before, but ultimately it's up to the public to fund the libraries, not for commercial vendors to take the hit when we cut library budgets.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I'm not crazy about the drastic increase in prices, but the actually do have a point -- namely this is a perpetual license to the library. The subsequent responsibility is for RH to honor the license into perpetuity.

I'd also say that it's not really the publisher's problem if citizens can't be bothered to adequately fund public libraries. I would agree that book purchases shouldn't take a significantly higher percentage of library funding than before, but ultimately it's up to the public to fund the libraries, not for commercial vendors to take the hit when we cut library budgets.

why should tax payers continually be bent over a barrel to fund pure greed? in case nobody has been paying attention, we have no money. we're broke.


in defense of the publishers however nobody forced libraries to become the free version of blockbuster and carry video games, cds and dvds. i'm sure that eats up a few bucks that could be used on books.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I'm not crazy about the drastic increase in prices, but the actually do have a point -- namely this is a perpetual license to the library.

No, they don't. When print is $20 and ebook is $120, there's only one conclusion to draw - greed.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I'm not crazy about the drastic increase in prices, but the actually do have a point -- namely this is a perpetual license to the library. The subsequent responsibility is for RH to honor the license into perpetuity.

And they are guaranteeing that, are they?
Somehow I doubt it.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by xg4bx

in defense of the publishers however nobody forced libraries to become the free version of blockbuster and carry video games, cds and dvds. i'm sure that eats up a few bucks that could be used on books.

A library carrying DVDs or CDs is no different than a library carrying fiction. It's just entertainment.

If you really want the library to go back to its roots, it should carry only nonfiction, reference, and classics.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

A library carrying DVDs or CDs is no different than a library carrying fiction. It's just entertainment.

If you really want the library to go back to its roots, it should carry only nonfiction, reference, and classics.

and i think i'd be ok with that. nobody is owed entertainment. why should tax dollars go to keeping someone else amused for a few hours?

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I'm not crazy about the drastic increase in prices, but the actually do have a point -- namely this is a perpetual license to the library.

I don't think that's true in even the simplest terms - the libraries have limited contracts with Overdrive. I don't think they automatically can convert books to a different ebook provider, for example, if their contracts expire. I thought this came up recently with one of the groups switching to IBM's having to sue Overdrive for the right or something like that?

[HoopyFrood]

I don't see the problem, if the e-books are too high the library shouldn't buy them. Buy the dead tree version. I mean this is like a no-brainer. I like e-books, but I don't want my taxes financing the greed of these e-book publishers.

But I've always felt the library is for and about books, not CD's, not DVD's, not video tapes...you get the idea. Books and reading pure and simple.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

If you really want the library to go back to its roots, it should carry only nonfiction, reference, and classics.

They could go a long way in that direction with no complaint from me.

I've never read this, but I think acquisitions librarians must experience some tension between catering to the public desire to read the latest bestseller and the traditional library mission of building a permanent collection of the best-reviewed books on virtually all subjects. Suppose that the only fiction purchased, by a small town library, consisted of single copies of titles that had won, or been nominated, for any of the many annual awards program existing for both literary and genre fiction. This would build an excellent collection while virtually eliminating overpaying for recent releases. But it would also eliminate a lot of public support for libraries.

[mitford13]

I understand and support publishers expecting an increased price for library e-book licenses, but "in perpetuity" seems to have little value/meaning in the normal usage of a typical library. Most of the popular content libraries provide, and which patrons currently use their libraries for, is not needed in perpetuity. Nowadays the major systems will buy 15-20 copies of a NYT bestseller, keep those in circulation for a year, then de-accession the extra copies when demand dwindles and keep a handful in circulation. I can sort of see these prices for an academic/research library, but for "everyday" public library use this seems extortionate to me. As much as I enjoy the e-book experience and would like to see my library provide it, as a taxpayer I will expect libraries to maximize resources and kick Random House to the curb.

And as FizzyWater states, given that Overdrive already appears on the outs with the Big 6, how much "perpetuity" can be expected from these particular licenses? Again, as a taxpayer I should be able to see some transparency in the contracts my library is executing with Overdrive.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Suppose that the only fiction purchased, by a small town library, consisted of single copies of titles that had won, or been nominated, for any of the many annual awards program existing for both literary and genre fiction. This would build an excellent collection while virtually eliminating overpaying for recent releases. But it would also eliminate a lot of public support for libraries.

A sure fire way to kill off that library; and justifiably so.