Bah. This is more of a rant than an article. The issues brought up are not even related. Important factors are completely ignored. I can only think of one word to describe his argument: conflated.

I suppose that I could bring up a whole host of counter arguments. These are things like ebook lending being as necessary to libraries as ebook sales are to book stores or that the practice of writing has become incredibly competitive, but it would be incredibly difficult to create a coherent analysis of an article that isn't coherent to start with!