Doctorow on the e-book rip-off for libraries

[Barcey]

A free market also relies on healthy competition. That is what is missing. Supposed competitors colluding in a spirit of 'coopetition' at the expense of tax payers and the library services. A 400 to 600 percent increase on an equivalent product is a clear market failure when supposed competitors do it at the same time for no valid reason and when the other major competitors withhold products completely.

[BadBilly]

Originally Posted by Sregener

As a heavy library user, I understand your perspective. Here's the problem. Say the latest bestseller comes out and your library wants to buy a couple of copies so they can meet demand. They shell out $19/copy (Amazon discount) and put 4 books on the shelves for about $80. It develops a long hold list of 100 people, but with 2-week lending for "new titles" the list clears in a year. At the same time, they purchase one e-book for $80. It develops a long hold list of 100 people, but with 2-week lending, it takes 4x as long to clear, except that the publisher has restricted downloads to 26 copies for the eBook and then it disappears. So they have to buy the eBook 4x to clear their list, or $320.

Now, as a library patron, of course I want everything to be free. And I appreciate and enjoy the convenience of borrowing eBooks. I dislike the limited selection and the long waits that come with it. But it is hard for me to say, "Hey, spend 16x as much on one eBook as a printed copy would cost." It is hard for me to look at the selection of children's books and say, "We could have a lot more new titles if eBooks weren't so darned expensive." So while I agree that eBooks are popular, and library patrons want them, I don't see how they are cost-effective if the library can't pass the costs on somehow.

Perhaps we could start a referendum in every town in America to raise funding for eBooks through a tax hike. But I doubt it would pass. So if patrons can't pay a fee and taxpayers wouldn't raise taxes to pay for eBooks, it means that every eBook means at least 4 physical books don't show up on the shelf. And over time, that will reduce the availability of information to patrons. Thus, as much as I dislike it, I'm willing to pay a small fee to borrow an eBook.

I think you're making an error here. My understanding, from what I've read, is that TBPH have adopted a couple of strategies: One, which most of them take, is to price the library e-book at several times the cost of a paper book. The other, which is the Harper Collins approach, is to price it at a more modest price but with the 26-loan limit. As far as I've read, it is not a combination of the two.

Now, about the funding of e-books in general. My public library has 98 branches. Each of these branches has a section full of children's books. I don't have children, so you can cut all of those. The library has many materials in languages other than English. I use very few of those. Eliminate those. There are publicly accessible computers providing Internet access. Eliminate those. Hell, close those branches that aren't near me. Eliminate all those presentation series and after-school reading programmes.

Now, I'm being facetious. But, as that short, incomplete list shows, tax revenue is used to fund plenty of stuff at the library that I'm not using and am not going to use. I don't think it's unreasonable that some of it goes to fund e-books. I pay my money and see no reason why I should pay for things I don't use and be expected to pay extra for things I do use.

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It is a FACT that digital goods are licensed. Software, music downloads, ebooks - it's all licences, whether you like it or not.

In that case, why don't the users get the benefits that come with licenses, instead of only the drawbacks?

I've got a big stack of paper books that I'd rather have as ebooks. Where can I go to convert my licenses?

I paid for some Kindle ebooks and have since switched over to a Kobo EPUB reader. Again, how do I convert those licenses from the Kindle format into EPUBs?

Of course, we all know the answer; legally, I'm out of luck, in precisely the same way I would be if I owned the books. I get all the downsides of both ownership and licensing, but precious few of the benefits of either.

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by Barcey

A free market also relies on healthy competition. That is what is missing. Supposed competitors colluding in a spirit of 'coopetition' at the expense of tax payers and the library services. A 400 to 600 percent increase on an equivalent product is a clear market failure when supposed competitors do it at the same time for no valid reason and when the other major competitors withhold products completely.

It isn't collusion when a gas station raises its prices 9 cents because it sees the guy across the street is charging 10 cents a gallon more for gas.

Copyright law grants an exclusive claim to a particular work of art. In this case, books. Now, we could change copyright law to remove that exclusive claim, but that's probably a different argument for a different day. Right now, if you want to buy a bestseller by a particular author, you have to pay the price set by his/her publisher. No other way to get that book.

But competition doesn't have to come from a specific product, just like you can only get a Big Mac at McDonalds. Competition can come from others offering similar products. So if a large number of independent booksellers were to offer eBooks to libraries at very attractive rates, and the libraries made it a point to emphasize those works - both in print versions and eBooks - no one could say that library patrons were being denied the opportunity to read quality works at a reasonable cost. Just like you can get a hamburger without going near a McDonalds.

I understand you don't like the fact that eBook prices are so high for libraries. I don't, either. But I dislike government monkeying with the free market every time somebody complains that the "market has failed" simply because product X costs too much. I think that in the long run, such intervention in the market will do far more harm than good. Socialism, for instance, "assumes the factory" and then declares that all the value is added by the worker. Works great for a while, but eventually the problem becomes, "Why aren't there any new factories?" Likewise, you're "assuming the book" and then wanting the price to be set below the value set by those who own it. Eventually, there may be few quality authors left to argue over. And it is my own interest in protecting the authors that makes me loathe to involve the government in this issue.

[dalai]

Originally Posted by Sregener

It isn't collusion when a gas station raises its prices 9 cents because it sees the guy across the street is charging 10 cents a gallon more for gas.

No, but how do you know this is the case here? A couple of months ago Apple and five major publishers were essentially found guilty of ebook price fixing. Is it such a great leap of faith to think that they may also have a common policy about libraries? Isn't it already quite obvious that they would like as much control as possible on the different distribution channels?

Originally Posted by Sregener

Copyright law grants an exclusive claim to a particular work of art. In this case, books. Now, we could change copyright law to remove that exclusive claim, but that's probably a different argument for a different day. Right now, if you want to buy a bestseller by a particular author, you have to pay the price set by his/her publisher. No other way to get that book.

True, but law could also demand fair and non-discriminatory pricing and licensing terms. I don't think anyone wants or needs more than that.

Originally Posted by Sregener

But competition doesn't have to come from a specific product, just like you can only get a Big Mac at McDonalds. Competition can come from others offering similar products. So if a large number of independent booksellers were to offer eBooks to libraries at very attractive rates, and the libraries made it a point to emphasize those works - both in print versions and eBooks - no one could say that library patrons were being denied the opportunity to read quality works at a reasonable cost. Just like you can get a hamburger without going near a McDonalds.

This is not the best analogy since a hamburger is hamburger and the only thing that changes is the brand name. Imagine a netflix-like service that only had movies from a few independent studios. Would it survive? Or to go back to books, imagine going to an online bookstore and getting "no results" for the first 30 books you searched for. How likely would it be that you would visit that site again?

Originally Posted by Sregener

I understand you don't like the fact that eBook prices are so high for libraries. I don't, either. But I dislike government monkeying with the free market every time somebody complains that the "market has failed" simply because product X costs too much. I think that in the long run, such intervention in the market will do far more harm than good. Socialism, for instance, "assumes the factory" and then declares that all the value is added by the worker. Works great for a while, but eventually the problem becomes, "Why aren't there any new factories?" Likewise, you're "assuming the book" and then wanting the price to be set below the value set by those who own it. Eventually, there may be few quality authors left to argue over. And it is my own interest in protecting the authors that makes me loathe to involve the government in this issue.

But the prices of ebooks for libraries are not so high because of the free market. Publishers artificially created two markets for their ebooks; consumers and libraries. And they did that by taking advantage of the fact that they can impose arbitrary licensing terms thus circumventing the "issue" of the first sale doctrine, which is what enabled libraries to operate in the first place. I don't believe that the free market can resolve this problem, which is also of major importance for consumers. At some point there have to be clear laws on what you can and cannot do with ebooks or conversely what an ebook license may or may not restrict.

[Barcey]

There are a number of ways that a government could intervene, in general I'm against it as well but sometimes they have to.

They could say that each loan is $x and we'll review it every 10 years. In my view that would be the worst option but still preferable to the status quo.

The easiest would be if they confirmed that the libraries don't need special editions and they can just buy at fair market value.

[hwlester]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

I've got a big stack of paper books that I'd rather have as ebooks. Where can I go to convert my licenses?

I paid for some Kindle ebooks and have since switched over to a Kobo EPUB reader. Again, how do I convert those licenses from the Kindle format into EPUBs?

Both excellent questions that I'm hoping will be addressed at some point. There are a couple of rarities in this arena... O'Reilly allows you to register one of their paper books regardless of where you bought it and "upgrade" to an eBook for $5. The second question seems to be at least one of the reasons J.K. Rowling created her own store to sell the Harry Potter books (not the primary reason, but certainly a side benefit): I purchased them once and have them tied to my Sony, Amazon, and Nook accounts. In order for that second question to be fully addressed, there would need to be some kind of clearing house where when you purchase a book from any retailer, you can transfer that license to any other. All the exclusive deals (especially in the self publishing arena) don't make it any easier.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Barcey

There are a number of ways that a government could intervene, in general I'm against it as well but sometimes they have to.

They could say that each loan is $x and we'll review it every 10 years. In my view that would be the worst option but still preferable to the status quo.

The easiest would be if they confirmed that the libraries don't need special editions and they can just buy at fair market value.

Buying at fair market value would mean that they couldn't lend the books. You'd need to say that they were allowed to buy the book at the price offered to the general public, and, additionally, that they would have the right to lend it out to the public at no additional cost.

[SteveEisenberg]

By the way, this eBook issue is a lot like the longer-standing Serials crisis.

To provide a concrete example, I just did a web search and found that a year's paper subscription, in the US, to the Journal of the American Medical Association is now $185 for a non-member physician, or other individual, but a minimum of $966 for a public library.

Have we considered that if publishers are forced to make the library price, and the end consumer price, equal, the new price will be intermediate?

[Ntsimp]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Buying at fair market value would mean that they couldn't lend the books. You'd need to say that they were allowed to buy the book at the price offered to the general public, and, additionally, that they would have the right to lend it out to the public at no additional cost.

When you buy something, it is yours. You have the right to sell, lend, or give it. You don't need permission from a previous owner.

[hwlester]

Originally Posted by Ntsimp

When you buy something, it is yours. You have the right to sell, lend, or give it. You don't need permission from a previous owner.

Theoretically... although with DRM, the publisher chooses what you can or can't do with an eBook: you can't sell, lend, or give it. In many cases, you can't copy text out of it (for quotes), print it, or use text to speech to have your reader read it to you. According to some of the fine print of some of the sites that sell the ebooks, you can't even allow your significant other to borrow your reader and read it.

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by hwlester

Theoretically... although with DRM, the publisher chooses what you can or can't do with an eBook: you can't sell, lend, or give it.

And that's exactly what we're complaining about. Welcome to the discussion.

[faithbw]

Originally Posted by tompe

That seems strange to me. In Sweden the cost for the library for a book is much higher because they buy books in special bindings so they last longer. Or at least they used to do that (I have not visited a library in years...).

Also in Sweden the libraries have to pay $3 per loan of an ebook.

I would imagine that libraries probably get discounts because they buy multiple copies at one time. Plus, many books are actually the same paperback copies you can purchase at a bookstore.

[hwlester]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

And that's exactly what we're complaining about. Welcome to the discussion.

Thank you. I've been a part of the discussion and understand the issues involved. You should direct your comments at those who don't understand, like the person I replied to who said that when you buy a book you own it and should be able to do whatever you like with it. If you look back through the thread, you'll find this comment from me on the first page:

Originally Posted by hwlester

Thanks for posting this. I have actually heard these points mentioned from time to time in various Overdrive threads here on MobileRead, but it's nice to see them codified. I'm glad to see someone is making an effort to do something about it.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by faithbw

I would imagine that libraries probably get discounts because they buy multiple copies at one time. Plus, many books are actually the same paperback copies you can purchase at a bookstore.

I thought libraries mostly bought hardback and that publisher have one hardback edition for libraries and a trade edition for ordinary customers. Also I thought that the price did not decide the number of copies. I thought library reviews was the deciding factor.