Publisher Lunacy

[gracie]

I'm probably missing something simple here, but, if a publisher is doing something specifically aggravating, as in this case, wouldn't you need to let BOTH the publisher and author know of your intentions?

Just not buying or never buying again, or whatever is fine, but not nearly (I'd hope) as effective as making sure the author KNOWS he or she is losing revenue because of a policy put in place by the publisher they selected? In this case he may not care, but getting a few hundred, or better a few thousand emails from furious former purchasers would seen likely to cause at least some discussion between the author and publisher. Or perhaps I'm hopelessly naive that either party would care enough to actually make a change...

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by RWJ

That is mind-blowingly arrogant. Such contempt for readers and writers all at once.

"All these rubes who don't buy our buggy-whips are losers. If we ignore them long enough the newfangled automo-BEEL will go away and they'll have to buy from us again."

Well, they *are* the Overlords of the Industry, Keepers of the gates, arbiters of what quality is and winnowers of the riff-raff. Been that way for centuries, too. Surely what worked in the days of Dickens and Doyle should still work, right?

Notice, too, that they've been "only" been dealing with ebooks for ten years.
It's apparently too soon for them to realize their idea of customer focus doesn't quite jibe with the focus the paying customers expect.

Definitely slow learners, no?
Then again, we should be grateful they deign to gift us an ebook edition at all. Especially since it's not as if they need the money...
We're just ungrateful wretches.

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

A few weeks later, the publisher for that book announced that they won't provide new releases to libraries anymore. Maybe never again, forever.

I am thoroughly confused. Are you saying that a publisher can prohibit a library from buying their book and lending it to its clients?

In Sweden libraries are uy law entitled to buy any material they deem fit for lending. There is actually a joint library service center that remove the covers and put on these special "library covers" (very firm and almost unbreakable) and there is nothing a publisher can do about that.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I am thoroughly confused. Are you saying that a publisher can prohibit a library from buying their book and lending it to its clients?

Publishers claim ebooks are "licensed," not "bought," and so libraries can only rent them on the publishers' terms, and loan them out through the software they've selected (which is currently OverDrive).

The library can *buy* anything they want. Whether they can "buy" an ebook depends on the results of a court case that hasn't happened yet, and no public library has the funds to tackle. Also, libraries are allowed to lend all they want--not distribute copies. Ebooks are typically copied, not lent. (Although there have been some libraries that bought Kindles or Sony Readers, loaded them with purchased ebooks, and loaned out the devices. For a while, Amazon was saying that was a violation of their TOS, but they seem to have backed down on that.)

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I am thoroughly confused. Are you saying that a publisher can prohibit a library from buying their book and lending it to its clients?

In Sweden libraries are uy law entitled to buy any material they deem fit for lending. There is actually a joint library service center that remove the covers and put on these special "library covers" (very firm and almost unbreakable) and there is nothing a publisher can do about that.

Yes. Currently, Macmillan and Simon & Schuster won't allow libraries to lend any of their ebooks. Hachette and Penguin won't allow frontlist ebooks to be loaned out. Random House is clamping down on libraries who allow reciprocal borrowing of ebooks. And finally, HaperCollins instituted a 26x checkout limit. Once one of their ebooks has been loaned out 26 times, the library must repurchase it if they wish to continue lending it out.

[Kumabjorn]

Ahhh "licensed", well that explains their power. I would have imagined that they could buy e-books from Amazon (mobi) and B&N (epub) and then lend them to clients, with backing in the law. In other words, the law was there to protect lenders (library users) and not publishers.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by CRussel

However, if you want an electronic version of the book, Might I suggest the Audible book? Stefan Rudnicki is the reader, and it should be quite good. I've "read" several of the Ender books as Audible books, and enjoyed them.

Out of curiosity, I just checked one of my libraries and the audiobook is currently available.

[vaughnmr]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Out of curiosity, I just checked one of my libraries and the audiobook is currently available.

Might need to check again, Penguin has decided to restrict audiobooks in addition to ebooks.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

Might need to check again, Penguin has decided to restrict audiobooks in addition to ebooks.

It's published by Macmillan Audio.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Publishers claim ebooks are "licensed," not "bought," and so libraries can only rent them on the publishers' terms, and loan them out through the software they've selected (which is currently OverDrive).

Fortunately this claim by the publishers is false. Ebooks are bought not licensed. Libraries should stop this nonsense of following the publishers terms.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

Fortunately this claim by the publishers is false. Ebooks are bought not licensed. Libraries should stop this nonsense of following the publishers terms.

Well, they certainly pay the authors as if they're *sold* rather than licensed. So far, nobody has called them on it on either end.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by leebase

Alright, I admit...I've generally been on the opposite side of this topic. I haven't thought it was unreasonable for publishers to take control of their pricing. I have not thought publishers were, in general, evil idiots.

However....Tor is just begging for the label of "a company too stupid to stay in business".

I'm a big fan of Orson Scott Card. Love particularly the Ender's Game series. New months and months ago that a new book, "Shadows in Flight" was going to be released. I PREORDERED the kindle book from Amazon. And today I went to my Kindle app....and no book.

I go to the website and see that the hardback was released today, but the kindle book isn't scheduled to be released for another YEAR! WHAT THE F!

I guarantee you that I'll have read an electronic version of that book well before next year. And unlike me, most people who are fans and are equally irate about this....they won't be paying for the book. Me, I'll just PRE-READ the book I PREORDERED and pay for it NEXT FEB.

Lee

Someone may have posted this in the comments, but Macmillian owns Tor and has been pretty vocal about being against ebooks. They've done all kinds of things to avoid putting one out or delaying it and so on. It is ridiculous especially since Tor in the past tried to be one of the up and coming companies trying new things. You can thank their new boss/management (They were bought years ago.)

I don't really get what publishers have against ebooks. I just don't. It's just another form. Get it out there and let people read.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

That's surprising, since he's pretty big on the SciFi scene, and his books (such as Ender's Game), have been on a ton of best seller lists.

Now, one of the things that are turning people against Orson Scott Card is that his views are leaking into his writing. Of note is how his apparent homophobia is in his version of Hamlet, when he made King Hamlet a pedophile, and he's wanting to damn his son, to molest him in hell. Also, KH's victims have also turned gay due to being molested by KH.

Some have theorized that Card has been changing, due to some health issues. He's suffered some strokes, and some have said that he's deteriorated, and that his dropping mental health effected his outward view. While he's never been a fan of homosexuality, due to his staunch mormon upbringing (his great great grandfather is Brigham Young), he didn't used to be so outwardly hostile towards gays as he has been since the early to mid 2000's.

I didn't know about the strokes. That's too bad. Yes, they do change people.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

Fortunately this claim by the publishers is false. Ebooks are bought not licensed. Libraries should stop this nonsense of following the publishers terms.

You've repeatedly made this claim, yet have never shown any thing to back it up. There is legal precedence to support the idea that you can sell licenses and not actual copies, such as with MAI Sys. Corp. v. Peak Computer, and Wall Data v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept.

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

I didn't know about the strokes. That's too bad. Yes, they do change people.

That's part of why I am not in full blown hate towards him. He did good work, he didn't used to be this way, the strokes are documented, and while his newer works aren't as good, it still doesn't mean I can't continue to like his prestroke work.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Someone may have posted this in the comments, but Macmillian owns Tor and has been pretty vocal about being against ebooks. They've done all kinds of things to avoid putting one out or delaying it and so on. It is ridiculous especially since Tor in the past tried to be one of the up and coming companies trying new things. You can thank their new boss/management (They were bought years ago.)

I don't really get what publishers have against ebooks. I just don't. It's just another form. Get it out there and let people read.

What they have against them is the low financial entry bar.
Their business model required the high costs to limit competition. That was neither an incidental nor optional component. Fast or slow, publishers will follow the milkmen and livery stables off the stage.