Filesharing and ebooks

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

Current (major) publishing doesn't maximise the number of good books published. It attempts to maximise those they think will sell a lot.

True. Cause making money is the bottom line. This goes off into a whole 'nother realm though of defining "good".

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ahi

Oh, for heaven's sake...

Are you completely unaware about the writing that took place over the course of the overwhelming majority of human history that did not have the benefit of a massive middle class and computer equipment?

- Ahi

Irrelevant.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by kennyc

And Bill this is the key, the crux of the matter. Yes some people are going to write regardless -- look at the blog obsession that is currently happening.

The question is whether the writing produced is worth reading.

My summation is that without a system the rewards the art of writing there will be very little worth reading and the impossible task will be finding that needle in the haystack. The web in general is already much in this vein.

I am not particularly worried about finding the needle. Places like Manybooks.net and Feedbooks (and for the Kindle Lovers, Amazon) already has a place for reader reviews. Given time, decent books will probably find readers based on the reviews of other readers. The needle might take a few years to percolate up to the level where it gets attention, but I think it has about as good chance now as it does under the current system.

I do however agree that a system that rewards the authors of books that find those readers is important to keep the authors who are capable of writing good stuff writing.

--
Bill

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

Current (major) publishing doesn't maximise the number of good books published. It attempts to maximise those they think will sell a lot.

True, but then again, if we assume that most authors want to be read by as many people as possible, then most authors will also write in a way to maximize readers.

Ultimately it comes down to a question of what makes a good book. To many publishers, Dan Brown writes a good book... to the literary elite, well.. not so much .

--
Bill

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by kennyc

My summation is that without a system the rewards the art of writing there will be very little worth reading and the impossible task will be finding that needle in the haystack. The web in general is already much in this vein.

How is this different with commercial writing? You're saying that the majority of commercial books are worth reading?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

How is this different with commercial writing? You're saying that the majority of commercial books are worth reading?

Potentially. But it depends on who's doing the deciding what "worth reading" means.

People have to make a living somehow, if they can't make a living writing, they will do something else and there will be fewer potentially good writers writing.

The commercial book system is driven by the bottom line -- at every step they are evaluating as best they can whether there will be a market for the book. If they don't they will go out of business. A bit like evolution but with different pressures at work.

The thing is, if there is no money to be made from writing, then there's not a huge incentive in learning to do it well. (not there there is no incentive -- there are certainly other potential reasons than money to write).

[ahi]

I don't think you understand either the publishing industry or the literary world...

- Ahi

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ahi

I don't think you understand either the publishing industry or the literary world...

- Ahi

That comment does little to shed light on the topic at hand.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Potentially. But it depends on who's doing the deciding what "worth reading" means.

The reader?

The thing is, if there is no money to be made from writing, then there's not a huge incentive in learning to do it well. (not there there is no incentive -- there are certainly other potential reasons than money to write).

So you're saying that the people who love to write will still have incentive to do it, but the people who don't love it but only see it as a means to make money won't? That's a bad thing?

[kennyc]

So you are saying it's all up to the reader?

[folecr]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Is it? Speaking strictly as a consumer and setting aside the morality and legality of it?

1: You can obtain a book by paying the author.
2: You can obtain the same book by "file-sharing" it via the internet from some unknown uploader for free.

As has been pointed out, often the "file-shared" version is better proofed and formatted than the "legitimate" copy.

Further, as Moejoe has contended all along, authors will continue to write and publish, regardless of any monetary gain or otherwise, because that is what a creative artist/writer does.

So how is it in your best interest to pay rather than acquire it for free?

Cheers,
PKFFW

I was going to answer this question by listing out a selfish consumer's reasons to pay... (want more content in the same vein, want more innovative content from the same author, etc. etc.)
And please note that this is without the negative connotations of "selfish".

However, I don't think this list of reasons is pertinent to the essence of this discussion. I mean ... thinking about it ... if I have money and I take something, is there a reason why I shouldn't give back?

Sure, there are practical reasons :
- It's inconvenient to give the author money (example, distributor asks me to create a new login to pay ... distributor floods me with junk email...)
- I may not have enough money to spend on luxuries such as new creative content
- I may think that my money is better spent elsewhere
But I, for one, think that these reasons are fair. If I feel content is worthless, I won't pay.

Again, I keep coming back to the same thought : if I take something, is there any reason to not pay for it?

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

So you're saying that the people who love to write will still have incentive to do it, but the people who don't love it but only see it as a means to make money won't? That's a bad thing?

No, I think what he is saying is this. Anyone can write anytime they want and their works may or may not be read by anyone. By including potential compensation for their work, the writer has an incentive to write what others might actually want to read, both in terms of subject matter and in terms of the quality of their output.

--
Bill

[kennyc]

Yes, thanks Bill

[Krystian Galaj]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

I have stayed out of this thread in general, but I have to respond to this post...

More books produced, at least more good books is a benefit to everyone. When J.K. Rowling first tried to sell Harry Potter, the publisher might have said there are enough Young Adult fantasy novels out there, we don't need any more. I doubt that her readers would have been grateful in retrospect.

The simple fact of the matter is that the best books often have something to say and that something to say might be most relevant to the generation in which the book was written. Sometimes that something is said by a first time author who is just pleased to be published and to have readers, but often enough it is said by pro's who live o write and write to live.

Unfortunately, your example is flawed at a crucial point - which is, J.K.Rowling wasn't expecting a large amount of money, or even that anyone will buy the book at all - and she still wrote it.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

Unfortunately, your example is flawed at a crucial point - which is, J.K.Rowling wasn't expecting a large amount of money, or even that anyone will buy the book at all - and she still wrote it.

The point was not about selling or making money but whether it would have been published at all.