|
One of the problems with "boycott" is that there are at least 4 different meanings I can see for the word in this context:
1. I will not buy ebooks but I will buy new pbooks
2. I will not buy ebooks or new pbooks
3. I will only buy ebooks at $9.99 (or some other price point)
4. I will only buy (acquire) ebooks from the darknet
And, of course, there are some permutations resulting from various combinations of the above.
Now, just to keep on topic, let's all agree not to agree on legality/morality of the darknet acquisitions.
Which of these boycotts does anyone actually think will work, since publishers seem to be perfectly happy not selling ebooks - it looks like they'd just prefer for ebooks to go away, or at least, stay marginalized.
So, alternative 1 is a no go because they WANT to sell us pbooks rather than ebooks.
Alternative 2 superficially hits them in the pocketbook, but actually validates their faulty belief that ebook sales cannibalize pbook sales - because the threat of not buying pbooks has no meaning if ebook buyers are actually new buyers who wouldn't be buying the pbook in the first place.
Alternative 3 is an attempt to drive down pricing to what many ebook buyers believe is a price point where publishes/sellers could still make money. But it's really a variant of 1 and 2, so it's subject to the objections against those two.
And alternative 4 also validates publishers' idea that the darknet steals sales from ebooks & pbooks.
Bottom line: I don't see how any of these boycotts can accomplish the purpose of changing publishers' behavior, because their behavior is rooted in a perception of economic conditions that is wrong, and price boycotting plays right into those perceptions.
Maybe price is the wrong foundation for boycotting. Maybe the better boycott is to boycott any ebook that is not either free, or free of DRM.
|