Is the e-book threatening the future of our literary culture?

[BooksForABuck]

As an ePublisher, I certainly believe that eBook reading is an attractive way to read and that publishers and authors can jointly continue offering a 'product' that can be sold at a fair price. Certainly the business model at BooksForABuck.com is that eBooks should be affordable--passing the savings on to readers. Nevertheless, I can't disagree that file sharing is a worry. Still, I think Apple has shown that it's possible to create a business based on distribution of digital files.

Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

You're right, I shouldn't make blanket assumptions like that. At any rate, it doesn't sound like an organization you'd much want to join...

I've been involved in organized SF fan activities for a long time, as a member of local fan groups, and as someone who helps put on SF conventions. I've been around long enough that I've at least met a good number of folks in the field, and some I consider friends.

SFWA reminds me of various of the fan groups I've been involved with. Ultimately, the group is a collection of people, with different motivations and levels of maturity.

There are folks in fan groups whose motivation is a desire to get together and do things SF related. There are others whose motivation is ego, status, and being a big frog in a tiny pond.

So it is with SFWA. While all are technically selling professionals, you have the same diversity of motivation, and not a few who see membership in SFWA as conferring an exalted status, and for whom the organization is an exclusive little club that they are privileged to be members of. Making membership more broadly available debases the status currency, so to speak.

I used to say about SF fandom "On a scale of real world imporatnce from 1 to 10, this stuff rates about a -2. Don't these folks have more important things to worry about?" after observing various of the feuds. Then I decided "No, perhaps they are lucky. Perhaps they don't have anything more important to be concerned with, and can afford to devote their energies to things I consider fundamentally trivial."

I feel roughly the same about SFWA. There are genuine issues facing writers that SFWA can be useful in addressing, like contracts, grievances, intellectual property rights, and health care coverage. (I contribute to the SFWA Emergency Medical Fund, because I've known folks who needed it.) And the organization does try to address these issues, when it isn't tied up arguing about how to do so.

If I were to sell enough SF to qualify (have to write some first), I'd join, because I think the organization can be of value and there are services I could offer. But staying tactful and diplomatic, and not laughing out loud at various self-important denizens might be a challenge.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by BooksForABuck

As an ePublisher, I certainly believe that eBook reading is an attractive way to read and that publishers and authors can jointly continue offering a 'product' that can be sold at a fair price. Certainly the business model at BooksForABuck.com is that eBooks should be affordable--passing the savings on to readers. Nevertheless, I can't disagree that file sharing is a worry. Still, I think Apple has shown that it's possible to create a business based on distribution of digital files.

How much of a worry is it, really?

Sure, there may be some copying and sharing, and yes, you might lose some revenue. But any losses would be impossible to measure, and in any case, you are betting there are enough people out there willing to pay for content who will become your customers to make your business successful.

I think attempts to prevent copying and sharing through DRM or whatever are ultimately futile and counter-productive. You can't stop it. All you can do is make it inconvenient enough for your customers that they may stop being your customers.

Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com

______
Dennis

[nekokami]

So, while we're talking about SFWA, what about the recent DMCA nonsense?

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by nekokami

So, while we're talking about SFWA, what about the recent DMCA nonsense?

I read Cory's blog on it. I also read Jerry Pournelle's. His response to an email of mine indicates Jerry either didn't actually read my email, or did but had a knee-jerk response indicating he didn't understand it.

Ultimately, this is another example of SFWA doing something dumb. Not the first time, and not the last. It will be a Religious War for a while, and eventually fade into obscurity. I'm just happy I'm not Michael Capobianco, as he has to deal with the fallout.
______
Dennis

[nekokami]

I read Cory's blog, but not Jerry Pournelle's. I have a general idea of where Pournelle would stand on this, though-- and while I think Cory is sometimes a bit over the top in an entertaining way, my POV is closer to his than Pournelle's.

The rest of the comments at Making Light were very interesting, I thought. Quite the spread of opinion, though nearly everyone agrees that this was a boneheaded move. Yes, I can feel sorry for Capobianco too. Steven Brust has an entertaining prediction about the outcome.

I hope that this will be part of a bit of incremental consciousness-raising on the subject of copyright and DMCA for members of SFWA, though I don't expect any rapid progress there. It does seem ironic that SFWA is so backwards (from my POV) on the subject of electronic texts and hysteria about piracy, given the nature of the field, but I suppose it's in part due to the fact that SF is the main form of writing subject to widespread filesharing to date-- again due to the nature of the subject, and the technical leanings of the customer base.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by nekokami

I read Cory's blog, but not Jerry Pournelle's. I have a general idea of where Pournelle would stand on this, though-- and while I think Cory is sometimes a bit over the top in an entertaining way, my POV is closer to his than Pournelle's.

Same here. Pournelle felt Cory was "looking down on the working writer" and "didn't care much for intellectual property." I pointed out that Cory was a working writer, went full time freelance in 2005, and tried to give some idea of where Cory was coming from. Jerry apparently didn't want to hear anything that contradicted his notions. So be it. I've better things to do than argue with him.

The rest of the comments at Making Light were very interesting, I thought. Quite the spread of opinion, though nearly everyone agrees that this was a boneheaded move. Yes, I can feel sorry for Capobianco too. Steven Brust has an entertaining prediction about the outcome.

<chuckle>

Yes, it is.

I'd actually like to see enough interest within SFWA that something like what Steven suggests could occur. I believe the guy who pulled this bone headed stunt ran unopposed for the office he holds.

I hope that this will be part of a bit of incremental consciousness-raising on the subject of copyright and DMCA for members of SFWA, though I don't expect any rapid progress there. It does seem ironic that SFWA is so backwards (from my POV) on the subject of electronic texts and hysteria about piracy, given the nature of the field, but I suppose it's in part due to the fact that SF is the main form of writing subject to widespread filesharing to date-- again due to the nature of the subject, and the technical leanings of the customer base.

SF fandom has historically been quite conservative in many respects, despite an interest in SF. Why should SF prodom be different? (Especially since a fair number of pros were fans at one point, and used the knowledge and contacts gained in fandom to help them become pros.)

See my comments to Steve on motivations of members. But I wonder if the people screaming loudest about piracy and infringement are the ones with the least to worry about, as most of the SF reading audience has never heard of them and couldn't be bothered to pirate their stuff.
______
Dennis

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

See my comments to Steve on motivations of members. But I wonder if the people screaming loudest about piracy and infringement are the ones with the least to worry about, as most of the SF reading audience has never heard of them and couldn't be bothered to pirate their stuff.

I've run into the same mix of motivations (including the wacky paranoia about piracy, believe it or not) in a non-profit weekend Chinese language school I was involved in. I think it's just endemic to volunteer organizations and politics in general. As Douglas Adams noted, "To summarize the summary of the summary, 'people are a problem.'"

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by nekokami

I've run into the same mix of motivations (including the wacky paranoia about piracy, believe it or not) in a non-profit weekend Chinese language school I was involved in. I think it's just endemic to volunteer organizations and politics in general. As Douglas Adams noted, "To summarize the summary of the summary, 'people are a problem.'"

Got it in one.

One of my contacts in the field shakes her head in bemusement at seeing that sort of behavior in her Aikido dojo.

Evey organization has a culture. The culture is an outgrowth of the personalities and interactions of the founders. The culture selects for compatibility. New people come in, and they are either comfortable with the culture, get with the program, and behave like anyone else, or they leave. So you can have a 100% turnover in membership, but the fundamental behavior patterns will remain.

The local SF fan groups was originally founded many years ago by folks whose motivation appeared to be the opportunity to look down on each other and play status games. None of the founding members remain (and most are dead) but the culture has persisted, and is still largely the same 40 years later. I've stated that a shared interest in SF isn't the purpose for the organization, it's the excuse. The purpose is to give folks who like to behave in a certain manner a place to get together and do it.

I think that analysis may hold true for any organization you can point to.
_____
Dennis

[mogui]

Originally Posted by ricdiogo

E-book is definitively threatening current copyright paradigm.
You used to pay the author's royalties when you actually purchased the physical book. The new ebook industry tries to adapt this paradigm by charging royalties when you buy the electronic version of the book.
When we have a media (the Internet) that allows millions of users to instantly share files, all traditional copyright system falls apart. It's illegal _yet_ but I believe publishers and legislators throughout the world will understand that the current system is dead and all efforts to keep it alive as it was before the 1990s are just a loss of effort and resources. The hundreds of millions of web users will just rip off all traditional copyright efforts.
But without copyright there's no cultural production. Professional writers will just stop writing since their work is not going to be profitable anymore. So in order to keep the industry alive, both publishers and authors have to learn how to use file-sharing in their favour. One tip: people like "free". So if they can find a way of giving people contents for free while still getting authors payed they will discover the wheel (copyfree).
The only reason we still have room for trying to keep the traditional "pay for it" paradigm is that ereading devices are not mass producted yet. When they will, you won't bother buying electronic versions of books, you'll just download them all from your favourite P2P.
Another thing that bothers me is DMR. You can nowadays read the first printing of the Gutenberg Bible. But will you be able to read a DMRed ebook in 100 years from now? I don't think so...

I agree. Sadly, this suggests that either 1/ eBook Readers will fail, or 2/ They will be made and sold by companies that have no interest in selling eBooks. I can envision a Palm device with a larger screen that will be an excellent reader and convergence device as well. There is enough written content around to keep me reading for the rest of my life, should I be willing to get it off of a p2p network. The consequences are dire for writers unless we can discover another business model. Two have been suggested here. One is DRM under author control, and another is advertising subsidy. Are there other ideas? Is there a better place than MR to discover them?

[ricdiogo]

Originally Posted by mogui

The consequences are dire for writers unless we can discover another business model. Two have been suggested here. One is DRM under author control, and another is advertising subsidy. Are there other ideas? Is there a better place than MR to discover them?

Donations is another one. Some authors already have websites where they offer their books for free while asking for donations.
Another possibility is a foundation (also donators-supported) that could pay the author's rights.
However, if we think of well-succeeded foundations, like Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation or Wikimedia Foundation, we have to consider that those do not have to worry about paying any rights to the authors.
I'm not sure if a "Free eBooks Foundation" could get enough donations to pay to all their authors. Unless they'd use a "received donations /ebooks' downloads" model.

[mogui]

Yes, a simple free book exchange would be great! It could centralize the process of donating to authors for their work. eBook shareware.

I should clarify: I think with all the creative minds at MR, and our concern for this issue, we could generate some new ideas. They don't have to be great ideas, but they may stimulate someone to give us a truly great one. This is synergy. Any thought you have is welcome.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by mogui

The consequences are dire for writers unless we can discover another business model. Two have been suggested here. One is DRM under author control, and another is advertising subsidy. Are there other ideas? Is there a better place than MR to discover them?

Actually, I honestly believe the BAEN model is working, and will continue to work regardless of P2P popularity. It's easier (and therefore cheaper, considering that time is money for a lot of people) to get books there than off the darknet. The books are better organized, have nice descriptions with book covers and reviews, and sometimes there are extras like essays by authors or editors. And no DRM!

If all the books I wanted were available at BAEN, I'd go there first, and happily pay BAEN rates for them. I think nearly all science fiction fans would do the same, and in fact, I'd venture to bet that most readers would do the same. That's why I'm really hoping the Tor-BAEN revival will come through.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I think that analysis may hold true for any organization you can point to.

I agree. It was certainly true about my state's Green Party. I gave up after attending a few ineffectual meetings. The purpose of that organization seems to be to provide a pity party and whining forum.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by mogui

I agree. Sadly, this suggests that either 1/ eBook Readers will fail, or 2/ They will be made and sold by companies that have no interest in selling eBooks.

Not at all... it really only suggests that DRM will fail. E-books or other devices that can read standardized content (like ePub) have no need to fear. (Some of you may have noticed by now, I say "ePub" a lot because I hope that merely using it enough will put a subliminal tag in everyone's head, finally making it the actual standard! )

Originally Posted by mogui

The consequences are dire for writers unless we can discover another business model. Two have been suggested here. One is DRM under author control, and another is advertising subsidy. Are there other ideas? Is there a better place than MR to discover them?

ricdiogo's donations idea is a possibility, though I'm not sure how well that'll work. Still, I suppose if you're popular enough...

oh, yeah...

ePub.