How to deal with ebook piracy

[Nick_Djinn]

There is another ignorant assumption that people are making......That every pirated book, or book borrowed for free from a library, necessarily = lost revenue to the seller/author. This is simply not the case.

If I download 50 music albums and listen to 5 of them, that does not mean that I was almost going to spend $1000 on music, but the sale was lost thanks to piracy. Certainly you could argue that morally the money is owed, but its harder to prove actual financial losses in most cases. In fact, one music pirate was able to thwart a lawsuit, or most of it, by arguing that he would have no intention or ability to purchase the music if he had not downloaded them.....This does not indicate that he is morally entitled to have that music, but it does show that the amount of piracy does not necessarily correlate evenly with an amount of lost revenue. People who pirate generally cannot afford to spend that much money, so while they are getting something they didnt earn, they are NOT costing the industry much money. In some instances they actually help sales by making something more popular, but that is difficult to prove.


Also, as an example of the last point, Microsoft stated that piracy HELPS Microsofts bottom line. This might blow some peoples minds, but the reality is that without pirated and easily obtained copies of Windows XP for most of the third world to enjoy, people would NOT be spending 4 months pay on a desktop operating system but would probably switch to some kind of Linux which is 100% free of charge. Why is this a problem for Microsoft? If Linux became the operating system that the majority of the world used, outside of the wealthiest industrialized nations, it would quickly develop and outpace Microsoft, or at least become a serious competitor as global standards move to open source formats, because people never had any intention of buying what they cant afford so its not lost revenue for microsoft, and its better that the world pirates microsoft (for microsoft) than for the free alternative to gain more popularity, because the value of Windows XP is largely in how common it is, so the less common microsofts protected standards are the less valuable their software will be, and the more popular the alternative will become even in the industrialized nations.....Bill Gates said this, not some computer hacker like myself.

Is it the same with books? Maybe not with artists who already have millions in advertising, but probably with up and coming artists who need to get their name out there.

Sometimes artists will put SOME of their books out into the creative commons, but not all of their newer work, and these free copies get people hooked and they end up getting sales they never would have gotten.

[jerrywojo]

Originally Posted by Fayth

I've read your post, but all I am seeing is a complete disregard for the livelihood of content providers. Authors need money to live just like anyone else, and the same can be said for editors, agents, etc. If everyone got all their books for free, these people wouldn't be bothering to make books anymore. As for the whole library thing, I can't see it ever becoming a reality.

I'm thinking agents should be the first to go. Would rather see 95% of net profits go to the authors. With all other entities,(excluding agents) sharing the remaining 5%.

Its time for the big publishers to move out of NY! just sayin,

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by jerrywojo

Its time for the big publishers to move out of NY! just sayin,

I agree! There may be a good reason for everyone in the industry to be located in the same city, but why should it be the most expensive one in the country?

[Nick_Djinn]

Originally Posted by jerrywojo

I'm thinking agents should be the first to go. Would rather see 95% of net profits go to the authors. With all other entities,(excluding agents) sharing the remaining 5%.

Its time for the big publishers to move out of NY! just sayin,

I feel the same way. I would gladly send a check or paypal payment to the author instead of pay Amazon and other corporate giants who profit from the labor of others disproportionate to their own labor.....there is a word for this kind of behavior, its called USURY.....a mortal sin according to Christianity up until the industrial revolution when attitudes started to change. Credit cards who trick you with increasing interest are also usurers and are destined for the 10th layer of hell, according to christian dogma.....not everything about the Church has been so great, but that is one rule that I wish more right wing christians would pay attention to when they try to rationalize the anti-capitalist message of Jesus against their conservative politics. Hypocrisy and selective reading I guess.

I dont have a lot of sympathy for Amazon making a few billion less if they are still making a killing.....but I do want to support the artists and would like to see them get more profit.

If the library was easier than piracy, and you could download ebooks from the local library via 3g to your reader, including textbooks for students which could cut down on costs and maybe pay for the whole program, then maybe we could get some compensation to the authors through the library system, and the hackers could still have their books for free.

[leebase]

Walk into a car dealer and just drive the car off the lot while shouting "it's not stealing because I wasn't going to buy it anyway!"

Lee

[Nick_Djinn]

That is a poor analogy, since copyright infringement is not entirely the same as stealing. Maybe this graph will help explain it to you.



http://memset.files.wordpress.com/20...y-vs-theft.jpg

Originally Posted by leebase

Walk into a car dealer and just drive the car off the lot while shouting "it's not stealing because I wasn't going to buy it anyway!"

Lee

That would be awesome if somebody stole my car but I still had it to drive the next day and nothing was missing, but somebody else also had an exact copy of my car. I wouldnt be offended in the least.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Nick_Djinn

There is another ignorant assumption that people are making......That every pirated book, or book borrowed for free from a library, necessarily = lost revenue to the seller/author. This is simply not the case.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see anyone making this claim in this thread. I for one don't hold that view.

But it's not really relevant. Replacing piracy with library ebooks, which will still incur fees, is a) too expensive, b) not going to fly politically, and c) might fail anyway. None of these problems are addressed by pointing out the incorrect 1:1 piracy loss ratio.

Originally Posted by Nick_Djinn

Also, as an example of the last point, Microsoft stated that piracy HELPS Microsofts bottom line.....

Sort of. They were very unhappy that their software was relentlessly pirated in China, but Gates figured it was better they were using pirated Windows instead of legit Linux.

Other companies do hold this view more explicitly though, and view the costs of piracy as an acceptable alternative to other forms of marketing. O'Reilly views ebook piracy this way.

Although your assertions may be correct, it's not really relevant to your proposal.

Originally Posted by Nick_Djinn

Sometimes artists will put SOME of their books out into the creative commons, but not all of their newer work, and these free copies get people hooked and they end up getting sales they never would have gotten.

Yes. Also, lots of writers and publishers will offer ebooks at $0 as a promotional tool while maintaining the copyrights (and charging for the books later).

But again... Not relevant to your proposal.

[Nick_Djinn]

I disagree. I think it is relevant. It changes the parameters of the problem we are addressing if the problem is not costing the authors as much as some people claim. More ebooks might be pirated than purchased, but that does not mean that it has significantly affected sales, and in some cases it might even be a promotion for sales.....I have sometimes purchased my favorite books that I was only introduced to because the first volume was pirated. That is a sale they never would have seen without piracy.

Next, I am not convinced that it would be "too expensive". If the project simultaneously cuts down on the cost of text books for students and is sold as a literacy program, rather than a pro-piracy anti-capitalist platform as I have presented and likely has thrown up some barriers stifling objective thought on the part of some people here, I think its entirely doable.....maybe not if you live in a rural hick state, but if you live in the San Francisco Bay area like I do, it seems LIKELY that stuff along these lines will eventually become the norm.

As I said before, if we can give students ereaders instead of textbooks, despite a rate of being stolen or damaged, this should tremendously reduce costs. Its easier to replace 1 reader than 8 textbooks per student that cost upwards of $120 a pop. It also addresses the problem of damaged and graffiti in textbooks, each copy being brand new, and you can take notes without damaging the copy saving your notes to separate file. Free books for children and college students would be welcomed in many communities, especially if it cuts costs, and it could easily be expanded from a school project to a community project if it works.

C. I dont care if it addresses the problem of reducing piracy because piracy is not a "problem" to the extent that most people argue. People assume that if 1 million books were pirated that 1 million books were not sold......lets pretend that I just downloaded several hundred books.....I probably didnt read them all and I sure as shit was not about to buy that many at the store. It hasnt harmed sales, but if you listen to Amazon and others, every single pirated book is lost revenue that they feel they are owed. Absolute garbage.

But if its more convenient to check ebooks out from the library than to pirate, it might not cost that much but MORE profits will get to the author than without such a program.

[Fayth]

Originally Posted by Nick_Djinn

But if its more convenient to check ebooks out from the library than to pirate, it might not cost that much but MORE profits will get to the author than without such a program.

I can't see checking out books ever being more convenient than piracy because it will still be a renewal based system and you would still need to be tied to a local library. Piracy will always be the most convenient way to acquire digital products.

For the record, while I don't agree that every pirated file is a lost sale, I still believe that there is at least a decent percent of them that are. I feel that when people try to make it seem like piracy means nothing and has no effect on content creators they are just trying to justify their own piracy.

[GA Russell]

double post

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by Fayth

For the record, while I don't agree that every pirated file is a lost sale, I still believe that there is at least a decent percent of them that are.

I wonder how popular among the pirates the perpetually best selling authors are.

For example, I can imagine that pirating a new (to you) author's books would not constitute a lost sale, but more like sampling the author's work.

But I can imagine that someone who has written many best sellers like James Patterson or Stephen King is losing sales to people who have read his books before and now would like to read the latest.

[Anke Wehner]

Originally Posted by Nick_Djinn

Books that are not patented do not require that royalties be paid. Anyone can downloand classics from before 1920 something for free and its not stealing, because they didnt have the same laws protecting authors back then. Also, I think there are limits to how long some patents last. Once a drug goes generic anyone can sell it. It might be the same with books, depending on where in the world you live.

Nick, patents apply to inventions. Patents do not apply to creative works, like books. These are protected by copyrights.
There are other differences but the name, including that one must file for a patent, while any creative work is automatically protected by copyright, or that patents last not nearly as long - something like 20 years after a patent was filed, while copyrights run out on 70 years after the death of the creator in most countries.

[CommonReader]

Obviously pirated books do not equal lost sales. However, those people who have downloaded a large number of pirated books do not really have to buy books any more either, unless they are looking for a specific book that isn't available as a pirated copy. Someone who has downloaded e.g. 4,000 books and just 10% of those are books are books he is really interested in, is kept busy reading those books for quite a while.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

For general interest books, the paper costs are only around 15% of the total costs. Basically, retailers and publishers have spent the last decade squeezing those costs as much as possible in order to increase their profit margins. Things like author's advances, editorial costs, marketing and other overhead make up most of the costs these days. (As a published author, go ahead and ask your publisher for a breakdown of the costs....)

So when are you actually going to back this magic 15% up with a real reference, from your "multiple sources"? This is the fourth time I've asked now, and you've pointed to ONE article, which had no print run size. In effect, making percentages useless as there was no sense of proportion.

Do you actually have any facts, or do you just like pretending that what you say is the truth?

73.6% Of All Statistics Are Made Up

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Replacing piracy with library ebooks, which will still incur fees, is a) too expensive, b) not going to fly politically, and c) might fail anyway. None of these problems are addressed by pointing out the incorrect 1:1 piracy loss ratio.

I don't really see why you would need to replace piracy with a library. Just count up the number of downloads (loans) each writer gets per year and pay them a few pence per download.