The $15 Boycott: Will you be participating?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by ficbot

I guess my problem is, I don't trust MacMillan to actually lower it later, since they have not ever done that yet. There are ebooks on sale at Fictionwise for $17 which have been in mass market paperback for over a decade. So they say 'we will lower it over time, sure' and it seems like they won't. As Dr. Phil would say, the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour

I do not think it is a good predictor in this case. There will be people watching and companies watching them. My take is that this new scheme finally shows that they will take ebooks seriously and that will lead to better quality of the ebooks and a working pricing scheme.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by The Hooded Claw

I'm one of those who has always refused to pay more than $9.99, and I'll continue that policy. And of course there are always free classics, and there's always reasonably-priced science fiction at Baen Books website. (In case it isn't clear, I voted "other").

The "classics option" is a very good one. If a person can only read an average of 1000 books in a lifetime (varies by person, of course), then there are certainly some classics out there than should be on the list (I'm reading Moby Dick right now, and want to read some Virginia Woolf).

I am in favor of the strategy of "sit this one out" until the prices are more reasonable.

[kennyc]

Just came across this from Kobo regarding pricing:

http://blog.kobobooks.com/2010/02/04...=Google+Reader

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Just came across this from Kobo regarding pricing:

http://blog.kobobooks.com/2010/02/04...=Google+Reader

Thanks! That was very interesting. I forwarded it to a friend who is in the middle of marketing his book.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Just came across this from Kobo regarding pricing:

http://blog.kobobooks.com/2010/02/04...=Google+Reader

Excellent post! It's great to see some real retail data on it and it's what I suspected. Amazon is not on the customer's side of this fight. They are on the side of making the most money possible. That happens to be by selling the books at the price most customers are willing to pay.

[bwaldron]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Excellent post! It's great to see some real retail data on it and it's what I suspected. Amazon is not on the customer's side of this fight. They are on the side of making the most money possible. That happens to be by selling the books at the price most customers are willing to pay.

Well, I do consider that being on my side as a customer, even though I don't attribute any altruistic motives to them, nor would I expect to do so for any corporation. I want them to make the most money possible, if they do so by providing me with good prices and excellent service.

[MrBlueSky]

Originally Posted by scveteran

So you are saying that $15 dollar price is enough to turn you into a thief. Wow.

I was completely floored after seeing that more than one fifth of the people here would steal because of a few dollars.

Ho hum, repeat after me until it sinks in...

File-coping is not stealing. Period.

It follows therefore, that one cannot turn into a thief for doing so. Simple.


Only one-fifth? That seems an incredibly low percentage. The majority of people must be clicking on the wrong button(s) by mistake


Seriously, you are attempting to pin the label of ‘criminal’ on people who are only taking advantage of the monopoly hoarders crass stupidity and unbridled greed.

By their own public actions, the monopoly hoarders are telling us that they are more than willing to forgo their own opportunity cost of making a transaction sale to potential customers — so we might as well just indulge them in their fantasies by taking to the free-way.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by MrBlueSky

Ho hum, repeat after me until it sinks in...

File-coping is not stealing. Period.
..

Ho Hum. Yes it is!

Period!

[jmaloney]

Originally Posted by mcl

So, would you pay hardback prices for a mass-market paperback released day-and-date with the hardback?

No, you wouldn't.

Would you pay hardback prices for a mass-market paperback released a few months after the hardback?

No, you wouldn't.


What we object to is using the hardback price as the basis for pricing ebooks. They're not the same thing. No more than a MMPB is the same thing.

Last I checked, Macmillan's plan would price ebooks at about 50% of the hardcover price on the day of release. I fail to see how the scenarios you outline have any relation to that situation.

[bwaldron]

Originally Posted by MrBlueSky

Ho hum, repeat after me until it sinks in...

File-coping is not stealing. Period.

It follows therefore, that one cannot turn into a thief for doing so. Simple.

File copying is not stealing, except where the file contents are copyright-protected.

And yeah, I know that the owner didn't "lose" anything tangible, and that "information wants to be free," and so on.

Ho, hum.

I do understand why people do it. I also understand anger at the clueless publishers. I also know that much/most piracy doesn't represent lost sales (and in some cases may even be good for the author). And I believe that current copyright law is a bit ridiculous, and likely to get worse (not to mention the DMCA and its ilk).

All well and good. It's still taking something of value, for which I would prefer to see the creator compensated.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Ho Hum. Yes it is!

Period!

Dum dee dum. No, it is not.

[cmdahler]

Originally Posted by MrBlueSky

Ho hum, repeat after me until it sinks in...

File-coping is not stealing. Period.

It follows therefore, that one cannot turn into a thief for doing so. Simple.

It's truly pitiful to see how people who grew up with the internet paradigm of file sharing have become so amoral about theft. This post from MrBlueSky is a perfect example of the attitude so many younger, internet-oriented people take: if it's not a tangible object, then it must not really be stealing. When there is no inner sense of right and wrong taught by parents who actually give a crap about their kids' moral development, the attitude of MrBlueSky is basically what you get as a result: "if I can't get caught, it must not be wrong." Or the old standby: "Everyone else is doing it, so it must be ok."

If MrBlueSky had spent a couple of years or more writing his own book only to see it linked around on various illegal torrent or Usenet groups, I'll bet he'd have a bit of a different attitude...

[jmaloney]

Originally Posted by mcl

The problem here is that the authors are up in arms against the retailer and the consumer, because how dare we take issue with an entire publisher and harm all those innocent authors! We the customers must spend money to support the authors! (See Scalzi's blog for a particularly abhorrent, yet almost verbatim reiteration of this position).

I know you're not a fan of Scalzi at the moment, but that's a pretty big freakin' misrepresentation of what he posted. Here's an exact quote from Scalzi (emphasis added):

So rather than focus on what should happen to Amazon or Macmillan, here’s an idea, and here’s my point: let’s us focus on the writers, who are getting kinda screwed here. None of this is their fault, it has nothing to do with them, and they don’t deserve to lose sales and their livelihood while this thing goes down. If you want to make a statement here, don’t make it against a corporation, who isn’t listening anyway. Make it for someone, and someone who will appreciate the support.

It's incredibly clear that he's not saying, "You must go buy author's books!" He saying that if you want to show some support, the best way to do it is to buy their books from someone who is actually willing to sell them. There's no "must" in there, just "if you want to".

I also don't see any place where he rails against the consumer. It's apparent to anyone actually reading his posts that he's pissed at one entity: Amazon. That's it.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by cmdahler

It's truly pitiful to see how people who grew up with the internet paradigm of file sharing have become so amoral about theft. This post from MrBlueSky is a perfect example of the attitude so many younger, internet-oriented people take: if it's not a tangible object, then it must not really be stealing. When there is no inner sense of right and wrong taught by parents who actually give a crap about their kids' moral development, the attitude of MrBlueSky is basically what you get as a result: "if I can't get caught, it must not be wrong." Or the old standby: "Everyone else is doing it, so it must be ok."

If MrBlueSky had spent a couple of years or more writing his own book only to see it linked around on various illegal torrent or Usenet groups, I'll bet he'd have a bit of a different attitude...

Those "amoral kids" are almost as bad as the hyperbolic folks who want to make a civil offense into a criminal act. I am not going to speak for Mr. Blue Sky, but if we want to have a rational discussion we need to not blow so much smoke right out of the gate. A number of people on these forums are trying to make some reasonable points about the the repercussions of different types of unauthorized copying, and shrill cries of "Thieves! Thieves!" is not particularly useful.

This is a complex subject for a reason; there are a number of issues to be balanced when deciding how to deal with copying, on both the legal and ethical level. It would be helpful if posters (on *both* sides) were willing to bring a bit more to the table and discuss this in a reasonable way.

[TallMomof2]

Why should I believe that MacMillan will actually lower prices. I've been looking at backlist ebooks and comparing prices of the ebook at Fictionwise to the cheapest new pbook I can order from Amazon. In Science Fiction why should I pay $26.95 for A Paradigm of Earth by Candas Jane Dorsey at Fictionwise when I can purchase a pbook version from a 3rd party seller at Amazon for $3.95? In mystery I can pay $27.95 for Someone to Kill by Kurt Corriher at Fictionwise or $1.98 from Amazon (3rd party).

I have no reason to believe that MacMillan or any publisher will lower ebook prices over time especially on backlist titles. The reasoning (or excuse) will be that it costs $$$ to produce the ebook title.

MacMillan and the rest of the publishers will most likely set prices for ebooks but savvy consumers will either stop buying overpriced ebooks, buy paper versions or go to the darknet.

Maybe the publishers will be better dropping ebook prices on new releases when the paperback is released but based on my experience it won't happen.