Public Lending Right as a model for ebook pricing

[DawnFalcon]

Ooh ironic.

Because there's currently a consultation about extending the PLR to non-print books.

"1. Extend eligibility for Public Lending Right (PLR) to non-print books, in particular audiobooks and e-books;"


Anyway;

"How much would you be willing to pay just to read a book as opposed to own it? "

About 20p. Less if the format is inflexible for screen size.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ea

Look at my earlier post. While creators of works in public libraries do get money in Denmark, it is not, and have never been intended as, a reimbursement. I was wondering if this might not be the case in other places as well.

Edit, added: It's a way of giving government support, like grants.

Apologies; I had missed your earlier post.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

If you want to be that nitpicky, many libraries aren't city run, but often at a county level. I was meaning free as in, no payment needed to check out a book.

Sorry but I didn't think I was being nitpicky. If I'm paying for a service I'm paying for a service regardless of where the fund are coming from.
For instance an neighboring city from mine does not pay a direct garbage bill they pay for it through their city taxes. My city however does not, so I pay a direct bill. Would you state their garage collection is free?

Also where I live there is a county library and a city library, one is ran by the city the other by the county. Out of curiosity does your state only have county libraries?

=X=

[Hellmark]

$5 is about the max I'll spend. Anything under that, I'll be happy with.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by charlieperry

You can’t lend it to friends, you can’t sell it

Are you sure about that? The publishers/retailers certainly want you to believe that you are not allowed to do those things, and make it very difficult to accomplish them with DRM, but I'm not sure what would happen legally. There's no actual law that I know of which is preventing you from lending or selling an eBook, at least in the US.

And yet you can read a library book for free but if you want to read the ebook you have to pay almost as much as, if not more than, you would for the physical book.

Yeah, no doubt many current pricing models are ridiculous.

[charlieperry]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

"How much would you be willing to pay just to read a book as opposed to own it? "

About 20p. Less if the format is inflexible for screen size.

Wow, that's not a lot.

I paid AU$12 to watch District 9 last night. I also just finished reading Gates of Fire by Steven Pressfield. Reading the book was free because a friend lent it to me and yet I reckon I enjoyed the book as much as if not more than I enjoyed watching District 9. I reckon Steven Pressfield should have earned at least a $1 out of me.

[charlieperry]

From Fictionwise Terms and Conditions

Important Notice: eBooks cannot be printed, copied, or "loaned" to others due to copyright laws.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Apologies; I had missed your earlier post.

No problem I just didn't want it to be automatically assumed that "library money" is necessarily a direct reimbursement for lost sales. I've edited the wikipedia page a bit now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Lending_Right

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by charlieperry

From Fictionwise Terms and Conditions

Actually, there is nothing in copyright law that says you can't loan it to others and there are many ways that printing and copying may be permitted under fair use. Also, as has been discussed on here multiple times, terms and conditions are not the same thing as laws. There are many conditions that companies state in their terms which are not enforceable.

Just because Fictionwise claims you can't sell/loan them, doesn't mean it's true. That's what I meant with my previous post. The retailers want you to think you can't, and put conditions in their terms stating that. But that is still a long way from being legally enforceable. I don't believe there is an actual law that makes the selling/lending of an eBook illegal.

To put it bluntly, the retailer is lying.

[Hellmark]

If lending ebooks was illegal, then you wouldn't be able to get ebooks from the library. The same terms libraries fall under, apply to people too.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

If lending ebooks was illegal, then you wouldn't be able to get ebooks from the library. The same terms libraries fall under, apply to people too.

Not entirely the same thing. The point about library e-books is that:

1. The buy a licence to lend "x" copies, and their software ensures that no more than "x" copies are in use at any one time.

2. The books auto-expire after a certain time.

I think that most people would accept that this is a reasonable and acceptable use of DRM.

[Hellmark]

the important thing isn't the auto expiration, but rather the limited number of copies at any given time.

[HarryT]

The two are linked. Auto-expiry is the easiest way to enforce the "only x copies at a time" licence requirement.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by charlieperry

Wow, that's not a lot.

I paid AU$12 to watch District 9 last night. I also just finished reading Gates of Fire by Steven Pressfield. Reading the book was free because a friend lent it to me and yet I reckon I enjoyed the book as much as if not more than I enjoyed watching District 9. I reckon Steven Pressfield should have earned at least a $1 out of me.

No, but "only read" has a bunch of connotations for me, and each and every one reduces the value of the book. I'd also note I typically read books I buy twice, at the very least, and typically on at least two different screen sizes - only one of my PC's has net access*, and so on.

(*A deliberate secure measure, which I won't bypass)

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

the important thing isn't the auto expiration, but rather the limited number of copies at any given time.

Also, there's a difference between public lending (library) and private lending (loaning it to your friend).