what is Sony thinking?

[Amadeus]

Originally Posted by mlkmnz

I'd love to know how much revenue the Connect store brings in. As in, is it working how Sony planned? I used my $50 credit and that was it. Maybe if they were all under $4-$5 I'd be interested, but not full retail.

I agree entirely with this - I did the same. If we think about paper books, I can buy a paperback for about $7 to $10, read it, then sell it at a secondhand bookstore or on eBay for about half, so there is that $4-$5 figure mentioned. If that was the price on the Connect store I'd prefer to do it that way than waste more time and more trees.

Originally Posted by RSaunders

That's why you can't sell or give away eBooks you've read, they know number_books_read is > number_books.

There are ways of making this work: -

- Use to DRM to control releases, so that Sony only allows books to be resold a number of years after initial publication.
- Alternatively, only allow books to be sold on a year or whatever after the initial purchase.
- Charge $1 for transfer from one Reader to another - again the DRM system allows this.

[ultim8fury]

How is this in any way in the interest of the rights holder ? they make absolutely no cash on the sale of second-hand books.

I've spent nearly $300 in the connStore now I have 61 books from there $300/61=$4.91 per book. If I convert that back into UKP I get £2.45. The average book price in the UK is £5.99 making the ConnStore almost half price. Sure some books are more expensive when taken individually but it all evens out over the long haul.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ultim8fury

If I convert that back into UKP I get £2.45. The average book price in the UK is £5.99 making the ConnStore almost half price.

£2.45 is only 41% of £5.99, so it's considerably less than half price!

[ultim8fury]

good point. I wasn't thinking straight. Posting whilst hung-over is my only excuse.

[DougFNJ]

Originally Posted by Amadeus

I agree entirely with this - I did the same. If we think about paper books, I can buy a paperback for about $7 to $10, read it, then sell it at a secondhand bookstore or on eBay for about half, so there is that $4-$5 figure mentioned. If that was the price on the Connect store I'd prefer to do it that way than waste more time and more trees.

There are ways of making this work: -

- Use to DRM to control releases, so that Sony only allows books to be resold a number of years after initial publication.
- Alternatively, only allow books to be sold on a year or whatever after the initial purchase.
- Charge $1 for transfer from one Reader to another - again the DRM system allows this.

I don't think Sony had the bargain hunter in mind when they created this device. The pricing is definitely not my concern. I was always one that never had a problem throwing money down for a new release Hard Cover Bestseller for a book. I also always kept my books never sold them, and rarely lend them out. As silly as it sounds I love looking at my bookshelf realizing how many books I've read, and often pick up a great book to read it again years later.

As far as the 3 ways of making this work:

1. Music services don't allow us to sell our music after a few years, I can sell a used CD or a book, but I don't see it happening with E-Books either.

2. Out of curiosity, how do you plan to sell it? Does that mean you can no longer read it yourself?

3. You can transfer your book, you just have to authorize that other reader or computer on your account.

Music artists stood against used CD Stores and Electronic pirating of music in the forms of Napster and and the like. Author's never seemed to publicly stand against used book stores, my guess is their philosophy was more open minded when it came to people reading their books......I'm not saying your ideas are bad, I'm pointing out that I don't think that is the market Sony is looking to go for.

The good news is sites like Manybooks.com give you the ability to legally download the books for free formatted for our Readers, and you can e-mail a link to someone without having to sell it and say this one is free for you too. You can't do that with music.

[ischeriad]

Originally Posted by NatCh

But what Apple did was say, "okay, here's a really cool music player that'll play whatever music you have electronically -- oh, and by the way, we've got a service that sells music too, but that music can only play on our players." (that's changing now, of course)

Well, Apple didn't say whatever music you have, but whatever music in mp3 format, which is the quasi standard for digital music. Sadly, there is nothing like a standard in ebook formats yet...

I use Linux, and neither Apple nor Sony support Linux directly. I don't complain because it's my decision, but for buying a device, a certain amount of functionality has to be usable. Open devices are a great benefit for all.

I have to give an example with portable music:
Instead of an iPod I use a Sony MD-Recorder - at the time I had to chose, mp3 players where to expensive for me and NetMD was very new, so I didn't know much about it and didn't want to use it.

Some time ago I bought a Sony MD-Deck via eBay, together with ~80 MDs. Sadly, all of them had music on them I didn't like, but more sadly, all MDs where recorded using Sony's NetMD technology. I could not erase them with my non-NetMD devices. But I couldn't even erase them with my NetMD-Recorder (which had replaced my first unit) without using Sony's infamous SonicStage software, which is - surprise! - windows only.
This means, to get rid of a lot of music which I didn't own, didn'r pay for, didn't like, and to be able to use the MDs again for recording my own music from CDs I bought, I had to find a Windows PC whose owner allowed me to install this crappy software and erase the MDs one by one.
This is DRM gone way to far.

In my opinion devices and software should stay as far apart as possible.
I gladly pay for content but I don't want to feel forced or limited.

- If anybody wants me to buy a reader/player, there has to be a possibility to use my own content on it, in an open format I choose.
- If anybody wants me to buy content (ebooks, music...), it has to be in an open format, which I can convert to my liking and to fit my existing and future devices.
- If anybody wants me to buy content through software bundled with their devices, this software has to be available on the OS I use, or I won't use it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by ischeriad

In my opinion devices and software should stay as far apart as possible.
I gladly pay for content but I don't want to feel forced or limited.

I can get behind that. Keeping hardware and content providers separate (on paper, AND in fact) makes for more and better choices of both for the consumer. Tying the two together leads to proprietarism (assuming that's a word).

[NatCh]

I think it should be 'proprietarianism' -- has a better ring to it.

I wonder how much of an anti-trust argument could be made against a hardware/content conglomerate ... probably not very much of one. Not that I'm disagreeing (nor am I advocating litigation -- just an idle thought), I just don't think it has much chance of success.

[Amadeus]

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

1. Music services don't allow us to sell our music after a few years, I can sell a used CD or a book, but I don't see it happening with E-Books either.

That is because the digital media vendors are trying to use the technology to rope in the rights that we have with conventional media for their own profit. IMO this is a retrograde step.

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

2. Out of curiosity, how do you plan to sell it? Does that mean you can no longer read it yourself?

Sony could easily operate a service whereby you de-authorise the book from your Reader and authorise it on the Reader of the person you are selling to. As I suggest, they could charge $1 a time for this service. After selling the book you would no longer be able to read it yourself, in other words exactly the same as with a paper book. Sony thus becomes a vendor of both new and secondhand eBooks. They could offer the secondhand service on a time-controlled basis, for example only allowing you to sell the book one year after you bought it. Or only allowing books to be sold 2 years after their initial ebook release, giving Sony a head start in new sales, but allowing users to recoup their investment later. This would stimulate the eBook market enormously.

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

3. You can transfer your book, you just have to authorize that other reader or computer on your account.

No you cannot TRANSFER your book. You can SHARE it on up to 6 devices, but that is not the same as selling it to someone else (who could then share it on his own 6 devices) and losing the right to read it, as you would when selling a paper book.

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

Music artists stood against used CD Stores and Electronic pirating of music in the forms of Napster and and the like.

I'm a music artist, and I didn't. Piracy is principally the concern of commercial interests, and those musicians more motivated by money than art. The money is nice and we need it to survive, but most of the musicians I know are more interested in playing their music and getting it heard.

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

Author's never seemed to publicly stand against used book stores, my guess is their philosophy was more open minded when it came to people reading their books......

I think a lot of musicians do think like the authors. They are tired of being ripped off by record companies who take all their rights in exchange for a piddling percentage, and we are seeing a backlash against this as musicians take hold of the means of distribution for themselves, setting up Web sites offering cheap downloads of their material and retaining 100% of the revenue for themselves.

Originally Posted by DougFNJ

I'm not saying your ideas are bad, I'm pointing out that I don't think that is the market Sony is looking to go for.

I think you're right about Sony, but I just question the value of what they are doing. The music companies got people's backs up by being greedy and the piracy arose out of that situation. Gradually they are either having to re-invent themselves or die. I think it is a mistake for the eBook market to try and follow the bad example of monopolising content at a relatively high price.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by NatCh

I wonder how much of an anti-trust argument could be made against a hardware/content conglomerate ... probably not very much of one.

Can you say "Microsoft?"

If the conglomerate can be shown to be actively discouraging competition through unfair or monopolizing business practices... you have your case. (If they don't have enough money to bribe you, they lose.) We are certainly not in that situation now. But in the future, well, anything's possible.

[HarryT]

In a capitalist society, isn't it the goal of every company to monopolise its market sector and discourage competition? A company's goal - in fact its legal obligation - is to make money for its shareholders, not to be "nice" to its customers! If being "nice" helps to win it business, then that may be a part of its business strategy, but one should never make the mistake of thinking that a large company exists to "make the world a better place".

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by HarryT

In a capitalist society, isn't it the goal of every company to monopolise its market sector and discourage competition? A company's goal - in fact its legal obligation - is to make money for its shareholders, not to be "nice" to its customers! If being "nice" helps to win it business, then that may be a part of its business strategy, but one should never make the mistake of thinking that a large company exists to "make the world a better place".

I mostly agree with HarryT... When I worked at Texas Instruments (in their DSP division) their stated goal was to ethically out-compete the other DSP vendors so successfully that they were investigated by the Justice Department as a possible monopoly. Of course, Justice wouldn't find anything actionable because they were going to do it in a completely fair and above-board manner -- by making better products and selling them for more attractive prices. Note: no irony in that statement. That's literally what they said.

The idea was that trouncing the competition by doing a better job than they do provides benefit to society as well as to the company (and it's shareholders), where monopolistically cheating only benefits the company. That's a business strategy that happens to lead to a social good -- but it's still primarily a business decision, not a social one.

In selling this idea internally, they emphasized that good business ethics was both "the right way" to do things (for the moralists in the crowd) and that it was "smart business tactics" for the "greed is good" part of the crowd.

Xenophon

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by HarryT

In a capitalist society, isn't it the goal of every company to monopolise its market sector and discourage competition?

Of course... but you have to do it fairly, and the definition of "fair" might be touchy. Still, as TI demonstrated, there's a difference between intentionally sabotaging the competition, and just being better than them.

[UncleDuke]

it would be in sony's best interest to buy a publishing house, one with a good back catalog. they could then offer these books on their site at a great savings and not be stuck with "we were only following orders."

even with drm who wouldn't buy a bunch of back catalog books for $1 - $2?

[dhbailey]

After having gotten burned in the VHS/Beta debacle, Sony bought Columbia Pictures so that they would have a ready-made library of content for the CD and DVD markets.

I'm surprised they didn't buy a publisher, or at least strike a deal with one of the big publishers for access to content, so they have to negotiate a lot of little individual-book deals.