Can e-Publishing Overcome Copyright Concerns?

[tirsales]

Correct and nicely stated.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Imagine if every time you exited a store in the mall you were searched to ensure you didn't steal anything?...

This is a perfect example of taking examples to the extreme to make a point. On any given day, I will walk into a store and buy something, and on the way out, a scanner will scan me for unpaid-for items. If I have some, the scanner goes off, and I am stopped. If I don't, I go about my business, not the least disturbed or perturbed.

It is possible to create security without requiring full cavity searches on every streetcorner. WalMart doesn't do it. Neither do most stores. They use efficient and effective systems like scanners, and people pass blithely through them by the millions every day of the week. So let's stop exaggerating the point.

[tirsales]

Yes, they create a certain level of security. There is still a big amount of theft in shops. That is not the point. The point is: TOTAL security, no darknet, no more illegal downloads, etc - is NOT possible. Not without means far more serious then the one in pilotbob's example.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tirsales

Yes, they create a certain level of security. There is still a big amount of theft in shops. That is not the point. The point is: TOTAL security, no darknet, no more illegal downloads, etc - is NOT possible. Not without means far more serious then the one in pilotbob's example.

Check back through my comments--go ahead, I'll wait--and you'll notice I've never said TOTAL security. I agree, that's not possible, and I have studiously avoided speaking in such absolute terms.

What is required is enough security to minimize losses to an acceptable level below the amount it costs to maintain the security (the same theory a WalMart, or any other retailer, works on). Because there's no point in spending a thousand dollars to save a hundred in theft losses. But if you can spend $95 to save a hundred dollars in losses, you're ahead by $5 (or, at least, $5 less behind).

And if the amount of money you can spend on security will not save you a significant amount of losses, or is much more in cost than the losses you'll recoup, you consider shutting down your store before you lose your shirt. That's basic retailer math.

e-Publishers see losses through lower profit margins (if they sell e-books at consumer-friendly levels), and they see losses through theft, in the current system. Basic retailer math tells them to spend on security, but if it doesn't solve the problem to their satisfaction, take down the shingle.

Amazon and iTunes are using their connections, their market placement, DRM, and a registration/ease of use system that effectively satisfies and thereby locks-in most of their users, to satisfy this equation. For them, the copyright concerns seem to be mitigated. Can any other publisher pull that off in another way?

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

What is required is enough security to minimize losses to an acceptable level below the amount it costs to maintain the security (the same theory a WalMart, or any other retailer, works on). Because there's no point in spending a thousand dollars to save a hundred in theft losses. But if you can spend $95 to save a hundred dollars in losses, you're ahead by $5 (or, at least, $5 less behind).

Steve, I honestly think we're already there. Nobody has been able to point to any study which has attributed losses in sales of books, music, or movies to the darknet. The most we have is one study (let's call it that) reported by HarryT that found that nagging people about paying their shareware fees worked better than not nagging. (Note that this study also found that nagging worked!) What we have here is a problem in perception, and I don't think that needs a technical security solution. It needs more education and understanding about how the darknet really interfaces with the cash economy, so content creators and publishers can feel comfortable releasing their content, knowing they'll receive a return justifying their expenses-- if the content catches the popular fancy, that is.

Regarding the "money in the crowd" scenario, since money is deliberately made scarce, I don't think you can compare it to ebooks. Your analogy to the soda with the recipe on the side is more apt-- and I think the soda bottler would still make money in that scenario, so long as the product tasted good and was reasonably priced. There are a lot of things I could do for myself that I pay someone else to do, like make clothing (or weave cloth or spin yarn, for that matter -- I know how to do those things). I pay someone else so I can have consistent quality and spend my time doing other things. The darknet is not user-friendly. Amazon is. If I could get replacements for my paper books in a non-DRM format at a reputable book seller for the prices you charge, I don't think I'd even bother with the darknet, even for books I'd already purchased. It would take a while, but I'd gradually replace my entire collection with well-formatted, legal ebooks-- and never look back. And I don't think I'm all that unusual.

Take a look at Linux, as an example. It's free, but takes some extra work to set up, even new "user-friendly" versions like Ubuntu, and then every task takes that bit of extra effort to figure out how to do if you're used to a commercial OS. But it's free, right? Wouldn't you think Microsoft would be completely out of business by now? Ok, MS may be engaging in non-competitive practices with regards to bundling Windows licenses on new machines, but apparently there are people out there who have paid to install Vista, when they could have gone to Linux and gotten more functionality for free.

As far as I can tell, all authors and publishers need to do to ensure sales is offer a good product at a good price, with--very important-- a good user experience during the sale and use of the product.

[tirsales]

You are 5$ less behind - and have annoyed people for 10$. That gives you a total loss of (at least) 5$

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by nekokami

As far as I can tell, all authors and publishers need to do to ensure sales is offer a good product at a good price, with--very important-- a good user experience during the sale and use of the product.

Although I don't disagree with anything you've said, I still wonder: If it really is that simple, why is it that publishers are fighting the internet and e-books so readily, instead of embracing it? There has to be more to it than that.

Part of it is the forced rewriting of their entire business system, partially because of the changes to profit margins that e-books would cause. But is the rest because they simply can't conceive of a way to offer a fair product and a good user experience?

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by tirsales

You are 5$ less behind - and have annoyed people for 10$. That gives you a total loss of (at least) 5$

I do not get annoyed by mirrors on the aisles or detectors on the exits or even security cameras. Perhaps your threshold could to be a bit higher.

Dale

[Greg Anos]

Hmm.. How about Gone With The Wind? It's in the public domain in life + 50 countries, but the copyright holders has threatened lawsuits with any Canadian site that hosts it as an e-book. The holders cite the ability to download outside of Canada as the reason. (That's why MobileRead doesn't host it, ever though it is legal in the host site (e.g. Canada)).

Is this a case of good security, or legal bullying? (Citizens of the country who enshrines free speech muzzling the free speech rights of another country, but protecting their own IP property?)

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Although I don't disagree with anything you've said, I still wonder: If it really is that simple, why is it that publishers are fighting the internet and e-books so readily, instead of embracing it? There has to be more to it than that.

Then fear of new technology? No.

Part of it is the forced rewriting of their entire business system, partially because of the changes to profit margins that e-books would cause. But is the rest because they simply can't conceive of a way to offer a fair product and a good user experience?

I do really believe that it is out of fear. The normal market runs smooth - why change? In their eyes they could only loose (not seeing that they will loose if they dont approach the new market)

Originally Posted by DaleDe

I do not get annoyed by mirrors on the aisles or detectors on the exits or even security cameras. Perhaps your threshold could to be a bit higher.

Oh it depens. I dont care about security cameras in shops in principal. I am annoyed by e.g. cameras over changing cubicle. Or by seeing camers on the street wherever I look.
I am annoyed when I get searched without reason. I am annoyed when somebody knows too much about my life (e.g. searching my traffic, logging my phone-calls, searching my PC, etc) without me wanting him to.
etc

Perhaps my threshold could be a bit higher - I am concerned more about civil rights and freedom then about terrorism (one aisle mentioned in this thread) or money (other aisle).

As I said - I dont care about the normal CR-laws, I dont care about normal security measures. I care about over-securing.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Is this a case of good security, or legal bullying? (Citizens of the country who enshrines free speech muzzling the free speech rights of another country, but protecting their own IP property?)

Legal bullying, and not unique to ebooks or the United States. Lawsuits are simply one more weapon in a corporation's competitive armory. Can't get ahead of the competition on merit? Slow 'em down with a lawsuit...
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Although I don't disagree with anything you've said, I still wonder: If it really is that simple, why is it that publishers are fighting the internet and e-books so readily, instead of embracing it? There has to be more to it than that.

Part of it is the forced rewriting of their entire business system, partially because of the changes to profit margins that e-books would cause. But is the rest because they simply can't conceive of a way to offer a fair product and a good user experience?

Possibly.

It is a forced revamp of their business model.

First, they have to figure out there is a market for ebooks.
Next, they have to figure out how to produce them.
Next, they have to figure out how to price them.
Last, they have to figure out how to market and distribute them.

A lot of companies are groping with these questions. I had a conversation with SF author Peter Hamilton a few years back, where he mentioned he got perhaps a couple of hundred dollars, all told, in ebook royalties. No surprise, as his then publisher was one of the ones that didn't get it. Some of his books were available in electronic format from them, but good luck finding out they existed and buying them.

I think there is a growing awareness that there is a market for ebooks.

Production still presents an issue: the standard marked up and typeset manuscript sent to a printer to make plates and print is a Quark file, which doesn't translate readily to ebook format. Most publishers want Word documents as electronic manuscripts from the authors (though Word sucks on long documents), but the author's manuscript requires work before it can be imported to Quark for markup and typesetting.

Pricing tends to be a killer, when a publisher prices an ebook at higher than a mass market PB.

And marketing and distribution may be the biggest hurdle, as most publishers aren't set up to handle electronic commerce at the retail level. Publishers are used to dealing with wholesalers and retail chains, not individual consumers. It wouldn't surprise me if a lot are jumping on the Amazon bandwagon because Amazon handles that for them. They have the infrastructure, and make their living dealing with individual consumers.

I see Tor's free ebook campaign as a symptom of the book industry coming to grips with the new phenonenon. Sister company St. Martins recently offered a couple of free mystery titles by a rising author in that genre, and parent company Holtzbrink seems to be trying to unify such efforts under the Macmillan umbrella. I think Holtzbrink is groping towards a coherent digital strategy, and will be curious to see where they end up.

Questions over whether to have DRM are minor pieces of the puzzle. changing your entire business model is always a scary proposition. Do it wrong and you could be out of business.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by HarryT

A British shareware author did an experiment to try to settle the matter. He released a disk utility which was either fully functional, or which displayed "nag screens" and had various other registration "incentives", depending on whether the PC's hard disk serial number was odd or even - ie, a completely random 50:50 probability. The program automatically included on the registration form a code which indicated which state it was in for that user.

The results: he had 7 times more registrations from the version that "nagged" than from the version which didn't.

That is, I think, proof positive of the not terribly surprising fact that most people will take "something for nothing" if they are able to do so.

I go back to the shareware days, and used to moderate a conference on the topic on one of the then prominent BBS networks. There was a lot of discussion on the topic of how to best encourage registrations. Some authors went the "freeware but registration desired if you like it" route. Some offered free "lite" versions, and pro versions you had to pay for (with the tricky question of what to leave out of the "lite" version). Many used nag screens, and some used time limited versions that simply ceased working after X days or X uses.

The biggest hurdle most faced, frankly, was product quality. There were an awful lot of "me too" products out there, that all did fundamentally the same thing. (And the freeware ones were often superior to the ones that wanted money.)

Nag screens and similar incentives were all every well, if the product was compelling enough and useful enough in the first place. Otherwise, the annoyance factor was likely to make the user less likely to buy it.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Sure, there are always people who will pay. But the point is, their number is a small minority of the people who take, and the resultant total of "payments" rarely, if ever, fairly compensate the creator for the amount of effort put into the work.

You can't make that blanket statement.

For instance, HarryT's statement goes back to the days before The Internet Ate the World. The standard method of getting shareware was to access a BBS that carried it over a dial-up modem. There wasn't really a "darknet" in the sense there is now. There were people who cracked shareware and made versions without the nags available, and lots of gossip about "name" BBSes accused of having secret "elite" file sections where you could download cracked versions of shareware and commercial software, and I suppose you could consider that as an early form of the darknet, though I wouldn't.

But the folks who frequented such places, and the places themselves, were a small fraction of the overall market.

I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of the number of people who will cheerfully get it for nothing if they can, but I have no evidence one way or the other. You may be right.

The bigger question is how big is the total market, and of that, how many are aware of and use the darknet as a source of what they want? Lots of stuff you are expected to pay for is available free if you know where to look and how to access it. How many do?

Your statement only makes sense if we assume the majority of folks out there are aware of the darknet and how to use it. I simply don't believe that's the case. I suspect the relative percentages haven't changed that much since the BBS days, but that's just gut feeling. I could be quite wrong.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

We still have the issue of the thread, though, which hasn't been answered to anyone's satisfaction: Authors have a concern about their copyrights and protection of same (justified or not, but there nonetheless). Can e-publishing do anything to alleviate that concern, and thereby open and improve the e-publishing market, which is the point of the thing after all?

I don't know whether it can. The question is whether it should.

Authors are concerned about their copyrights and protection. Fine. They don't have to authorize an electronic version. If they sell a book to a publisher, they can specify "no ebook edition" as part of the contract. I doubt a publisher will insist on an electronic version to do the deal at all. Or perhaps the publisher (or author's agent) will propose "Only a digital edition through Amazon for the Kindle, with DRM to make sure people cant steal it." If the author goes for that, also fine.

If an author chooses not to swim in the ebook pool because "Hey, there are sharks out there!", tough. That's their loss. There are more ebooks out there I want to read now than I have time for. I might miss a few folks who won't jump in the pool out of fear, but I won't miss them that badly. And they may lose potential sales simply because they don't have an electronic edition.

Meanwhile, other authors will see the potential, do deals to get books issued as ebooks, sell books, and make money. Losses to the darknet? Probably, but with no firm numbers on how much, it's pointless to even be concerned. Worry about increasing the sales you make, not cutting your losses on piracy.
______
Dennis