People who want no DRM are impractical dreamers...

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by stonetools

But they won't continue to write and publish books if THEY don't get paid. I love me some Joe Abercrombie. But he doesn't HAVE to write books. He just can go back to writing screenplays if he can't make a living writing novels.

The reason sales may be falling is due to the Agency 6. What they've done is raise prices and place restrictions that cause a lot of people not to buy. If piracy is up and sales are down, blame the publishers and the authors. I don't see the authors doing anything to help try and reverse the crap the publisher are pulling.

[HamsterRage]

Consumers that are aware of DRM universally hate DRM. We hated it on software, we hated it on music and we hate it on ebooks.

Now this is just me, but I'd think that any industry looking extinction in the eye would be desperately looking for ways to avoid alienating their customers.

Another thing I've noticed is that people tend to act up to the way that they are treated. For instance, if a company treats its employees like irresponsible children that can't be trusted, then many of them will behave just that way. On the other hand, if it treats them like mature, trustworthy adults then a large proportion of them behave as mature, trustworthy adults. Not all of them, but many will.

So when a company treats each of its customers as nothing more than potential thieves, then what's likely to happen?

[stonetools]

One last post and I'm done for the night.The ad hominem crew are in a state of most noble confusion. On the last thread they swore that I was shilling for Apple. On this thread I'm supposed to be working for the publishers. I'm going to really confuse the knuckleheads by doing a pro Amazon post next
But enough about the knuckleheads.Elfwreck summed up the thread pretty well above, and I would add the following.
The average user doesn't give a damn about DRM. If they did, we would see rapidly falling sales of ebook sales and ereader devices. Instead we see rapidly RISING sales of ebooks and ereaders. And the most popular device? The Amazon Kindle, which has a proprietary format AND the most restrictive DRM. So all of the digerati who profess solicitude for the average user, relax: the average user is OK with DRM.
What's odd is that the very people who rail against DRM seem to be Amazon devotees. I suspect that the railing against DRM is really a concern with plain old prices.
I think DRM is a two edged sword. On one hand, it stops or slows down casual sharing, which is what the publishers are REALLY concerned about. On the other hand, it gets the digerati really riled up, for reasons ideological and economic.
It seems clear that there is no definitive answer to my question. Whats also clear is that the digerati wants the publishing industry to take a leap of faith into the dark, based on the digerati's earnest assurances that ending DRM would have no effect on revenue. Its not surprising that the publishing industry won't be taking that leap.

[Dopedangel]

A few years ago with few dedicated reading devices I think piracy would not have hurt ebook today it will effect authors more so than musicians etc who make money from concerts etc.
But I don't think drm is the solution the actual way would be for the industry to shed a lot of dead weight and remove costs and price ebooks better plus they also have to give up on paper books specially for fiction.
I know their are people that want physical books for such they should make a custom order system where a book is printed on order with formatting requirements like font size etc for the buyer.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by stonetools

One last post and I'm done for the night.The ad hominem crew are in a state of most noble confusion. On the last thread they swore that I was shilling for Apple. On this thread I'm supposed to be working for the publishers. I'm going to really confuse the knuckleheads by doing a pro Amazon post next
But enough about the knuckleheads.Elfwreck summed up the thread pretty well above, and I would add the following.
The average user doesn't give a damn about DRM. If they did, we would see rapidly falling sales of ebook sales and ereader devices. Instead we see rapidly RISING sales of ebooks and ereaders. And the most popular device? The Amazon Kindle, which has a proprietary format AND the most restrictive DRM. So all of the digerati who profess solicitude for the average user, relax: the average user is OK with DRM.
What's odd is that the very people who rail against DRM seem to be Amazon devotees. I suspect that the railing against DRM is really a concern with plain old prices.
I think DRM is a two edged sword. On one hand, it stops or slows down casual sharing, which is what the publishers are REALLY concerned about. On the other hand, it gets the digerati really riled up, for reasons ideological and economic.
It seems clear that there is no definitive answer to my question. Whats also clear is that the digerati wants the publishing industry to take a leap of faith into the dark, based on the digerati's earnest assurances that ending DRM would have no effect on revenue. Its not surprising that the publishing industry won't be taking that leap.

What nonsense. You're not getting it any more than the publisher do and thus it's clear to see why. As you all but admitted you are employed by the industry. You keep flinging innuendos and insults at anyone that doesn't agree with you and dares to say so and to point out the reasons.

DRM is just wrong period. It's been shown to be wrong in every case it's been used. I'll say it for the third time -- video, music and computer games.
It does matter to the average consumer, it will matter more the more of them get bit by publishers dropping titles or going out of business. DRM exists for no other reason than an attempt to maintain the status quo and keep their business model in place. The publishers are doing everything they can to prevent the industry changing.

What's impractical (note title) is to try to keep selling buggy whips when there are no more buggies.

The sooner they (and you since you are part of them) realize it, the better off everyone will be.

What's practical is to adapt your business model to embrace the new technologies and make them work for you.

When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by kennyc

The publishers are doing everything they can to prevent the industry changing.

What's impractical (note title) is to try to keep selling buggy whips when there are no more buggies.

The sooner they (and you since you are part of them) realize it, the better off everyone will be.

What's practical is to adapt your business model to embrace the new technologies and make them work for you.

When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn.

Kenny, that is so correct.

Publishing companies, that is, the Agency 6, sit and watch the incoming asteroid of change like a kangaroo caught in a cars headlights.

Refusal to evolve and not taking serious note of the changing environment around them simply dooms them to failure.

Another word for that is extinction.

[Worldwalker]

Stonetools' comment a few pages ago about us not caring about those poor publishers still rankles. Something to consider, Stonetools (and yes, we do still think you work for Apple ... anyone remember what company pushed to create the "agency model" in the first place?):

When you buy an ebook instead of a pbook, you're being horribly callous about...

Lumberjacks felling trees for pulp wood.
Employees of paper mills making paper out of those logs.
Truck drivers hauling logs to mills, paper to printers, books to stores, etc.
Railroads and all their employees doing likewise.
Pressmen and all their colleagues at printing companies.
Brick-and-mortar bookstore employees.
All the people in auxiliary industries, such as the ones who make ink for printers, sell sandwiches to store clerks, etc.

Clearly, proper respect for everyone who toils to bring you your book should include not buying ebooks at all, so that you can properly support the hundreds of people from the nursery worker who sprouts the seed that will become the tree your paper came from to the store clerk who puts the finished book in a bag and hands it across the counter. How dare you not care about all of them, and all of their jobs? They're important, you know! And you're admitting you don't care about any of them, and just want a book?

Sounds kind of ridiculous, doesn't it? It's just as ridiculous for the average person (that is, someone not employed in the publishing industry) to care about publishers. Authors, sure -- we pay attention to them because they write our books, and their names are on the covers in big letters. But if some change in business structure or strategy causes, say, "management executives" at Random House to become unnecessary, nobody cares any more than we care about the people who used to sell ink to Random House's printer. We just want to read a book. Sink or swim. If there's no further need for printer's ink -- or whatever middle managers actually do -- such is life, and it's time to look into some other line of work.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by stonetools

It seems clear that there is no definitive answer to my question. Whats also clear is that the digerati wants the publishing industry to take a leap of faith into the dark, based on the digerati's earnest assurances that ending DRM would have no effect on revenue. Its not surprising that the publishing industry won't be taking that leap.

(Am I a digerati now? Digeratus?)

It's not so much, "want the publishing industry to take a leap of faith into the dark," as "dammit, the publishing industry is wailing that they're going under and demanding fixes, and insisting that they must DO SOMETHING about all the PIRACY THAT IS DESTROYING THEM." And we came back with answers: Get rid of the reasons people don't buy stuff--

Make it so they can use what they buy the way they expect to. DRM doesn't bother anyone until they buy a second device--but if that device isn't compatible, it's off to the darknet to get a workable version of what they already paid for.

Check the quality before putting it on the shelf--make sure the digital version is as free of typos and as well-formatted as the print version. Which means more than "shove it through the auto-convert process."

Set the price at a level people are willing to pay. If publishers can't make money at that price? They're doomed anyway.

Price, quality, & reliability are not exotic business tricks. They're the basics. Insisting that they are too risky or costly, and customers need to settle for what's being provided ... well, okay, but that's the current status quo, and the publishers & authors are screaming about that.

The digerati are not lacking in books to read, whatever their chosen level of payment is. It's the publishers who are insisting they're not making enough sales--and they seem to think that punishing the wrongdoers will somehow make those sales happen.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Publishers charge authors 75-95% of a book's income for doing all that, including features an author may not need. (Some authors can do their own formatting better than the publisher.) Authors who aren't willing to give up that percentage are looking for other options.

What the monetary split is between publishers and authors is a matter for them to hash out; it is irrelevant to me as a reader. (Though I do think you severely underestimate the importance of the publisher.) All I care about as a reader is that I have something to read that, first, meets minimum standards of quality, and that's why I only consider books from actual publishers.

If you want a filter for the glut of self-published books, well, we have that already too: the publishers and literary agents. I seriously doubt self-publishing is the first choice of a writer. He or she has most likely already been rejected by literary agents and/or publishers. And I don't even have to pay separately for that filtering process!

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by stonetools

The average user doesn't give a damn about DRM. If they did, we would see rapidly falling sales of ebook sales and ereader devices. Instead we see rapidly RISING sales of ebooks and ereaders. And the most popular device? The Amazon Kindle, which has a proprietary format AND the most restrictive DRM. So all of the digerati who profess solicitude for the average user, relax: the average user is OK with DRM.
What's odd is that the very people who rail against DRM seem to be Amazon devotees. I suspect that the railing against DRM is really a concern with plain old prices.

The average user is most likely has a shiny new Kindle as his or her first e-reader, doesn't care that library books are off-limits because his or her local library has a meager selection, and is happy with Amazon and Kindle. But in a year or two? Time for a new e-reader, and, oops, can't buy anything but another Kindle even though average user now thinks a Nook or a Sony or some spiffy newfangled device is better. THAT'S when your average user comes up against the restrictions and gets upset.

The average user is NOT OK with DRM, because he or she doesn't yet even know about it.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

...and they seem to think that punishing the wrongdoers will somehow make those sales happen.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Or, as most people learn somewhere in kindergarten, no matter how hard you punch someone, you can't make them like you.

[snipenekkid]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Or, as most people learn somewhere in kindergarten, no matter how hard you punch someone, you can't make them like you.

but it does get you extra milk and an extra dessert of the day at lunch.

[snipenekkid]

Originally Posted by sabredog

Kenny, that is so correct.

Publishing companies, that is, the Agency 6, sit and watch the incoming asteroid of change like a kangaroo caught in a cars headlights.

Refusal to evolve and not taking serious note of the changing environment around them simply dooms them to failure.

Another word for that is extinction.

you imply that is a bad thing. Aren't they just the big version of NYC rats? And the idea of bigger NYC rats is flat scary even to a capybara. Oops, that is another thread all of it's own.

[Piper_]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

no matter how hard you punch someone, you can't make them like you.

qft

Whenever I see these publisher apologetics doing their thing, the PR person in me just... <facepalm>

Are there no voices of wisdom in this industry? No one who realizes the folly in setting themselves up as antagonistic to their customers? Are the smart people in publishing just being ignored?

I don't know.

I do know this: As long as I see publishers continue doing such things as

• - Disabling TTS (by means of drm)
  
• - Disallowing even the most restrictive of lending features. Seriously - this isn't just a matter of, "DRM is needed to keep people from casually using facebook to spread to hundreds or thousands of people."
  They also think a one-time only, 14 day, exclusive-use lending of a book in its lifetime is too much.
  
• - Blowing off the simplest of error-checking and inclusion of important images, like maps
  
• - Insulting us or our intelligence in confrontations

Well, I'm usually a pretty soft heart, but yeesh, I'm having a very hard time scraping up anything like trust or benevolence toward them.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Catlady

All I care about as a reader is that I have something to read that, first, meets minimum standards of quality, and that's why I only consider books from actual publishers.

I care that the content is within my range of interest, which is why I started branching out from traditional publishers. And most of the fanfic I read is better edited than a lot of published books; I've given up on the belief that "professional publisher" means "quality editing."

If you want a filter for the glut of self-published books, well, we have that already too: the publishers and literary agents.

And yet they fail to provide me with 80,000 words of funny RPG anecodotes. The M/M erotica in the Big 6 is also sparse, and the selection in the indie houses is of random quality levels; they haven't all sorted out editorial standards, and the market is so niche that they don't know how to advertise to people who're selective within it.

I seriously doubt self-publishing is the first choice of a writer.

It didn't used to be; that's changing. A lot of newer authors are noticing that there's not a whole lot of incentive for (1) signing over 70-90% of the cover price to someone else, for the entire sales life of the book, and (2) waiting three years between an agreement of "this is good" and income starting to get to the author.

By going the trad publishing route, the author has a chance of catching you as a customer. By skipping it and self-pubbing, the author has a chance of catching me as a customer. As things currently stand, no author is going to get both of us as paying readers. (I dunno... do you buy self-published books that were reclaimed by the authors after the initial print run expired?)

Since the big publishing houses are never going to cover the range of books I'm interested in--at least, not anytime soon, because the print market for them is too tiny--I'm looking for ways to find good content.

I could just skip paid books altogether and read fanfic. That genre, I know how to find the good stuff for, and it's practically infinite. It'd probably keep me happy for many many years, but I wouldn't be supporting any authors by paying them. Well, except for the handful of fanfic authors who go pro.