Online petition over library ebook embargo

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by Tomk2

And what about the current library trend of eliminating late fees? Now it doesnt cost you anything to return a book late. Does that remove too much "friction?" Or do publishers want books returned late so fewer patrons can read it and waits grow longer? My only disdain for the publishers is a direct reflection of the disdain they have for library patrons.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I know you are probably including paper books. I assume you are aware that in the case of ebooks they automatically are returned at the end of the checkout period.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by Tomk2

And what about the current library trend of eliminating late fees? Now it doesnt cost you anything to return a book late. Does that remove too much "friction?" Or do publishers want books returned late so fewer patrons can read it and waits grow longer? My only disdain for the publishers is a direct reflection of the disdain they have for library patrons.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Removing late fees from physical books adds friction to those trying to borrow it when the book is out. Now there’s less incentive for the person who has it to return it in a timely fashion.

It’s a poor half measure to emulate borrowing ebooks but misses the crucial point of ebooks be automatically returned.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Removing late fees from physical books adds friction to those trying to borrow it when the book is out. Now there’s less incentive for the person who has it to return it in a timely fashion.

Less incentive to return it in a timely fashion, but more incentive to return it in a somewhat less than timely fashion? I.e., at least the library gets the book back when the person finishes it or gets around to it, unlike the cases where the fine has racked up to the point where the person just keeps it and walks away. In addition, it lets people who may need the library most and can't afford fines to remain as patrons in good standing.

One of those situations with conflicting aims and no perfect solution. It is why libraries will occasionally have "forgiveness" periods, when fines are wiped if you'll just bring back the book.

Let's be clear: I'm not excusing those who don't return books; at the same time it's the reality and the situation can be complicated. Punitive measures may not achieve the desired or the "best" result, whatever that's perceived to be.

[Tomk2]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

I know you are probably including paper books. I assume you are aware that in the case of ebooks they automatically are returned at the end of the checkout period.

Yes. McMillan specifically mentioned late fees and making trips to the library which specifically made the lending process of paper books tolerable. Since ebooks have none of that, the embargo is targeted at ebooks. Now that late fees are being cancelled, the only "friction" left for paper book borrowing is the trip to the library. Is that enough for McMillan? Libraries better not start delivering books! LOL.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by Tomk2

Yes. McMillan specifically mentioned late fees and making trips to the library which specifically made the lending process of paper books tolerable. Since ebooks have none of that, the embargo is targeted at ebooks. Now that late fees are being cancelled, the only "friction" left for paper book borrowing is the trip to the library. Is that enough for McMillan? Libraries better not start delivering books! LOL.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Who’s McMillan?

The friction of returning is still there, you still have no idea when the person with the book is going to return it, it’s marginally eased up on the extreme late returns but there’s nothing to say that will increase returns.

So yeah it’s “better” but still no where near the frictionless of borrowing ebooks.

Obviously the embargo is targeted at ebooks, it only deals with ebooks. Did anyone think that the embargo of ebooks was meant to decrease borrowing physical books?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

Less incentive to return it in a timely fashion, but more incentive to return it in a somewhat less than timely fashion? I.e., at least the library gets the book back when the person finishes it or gets around to it, unlike the cases where the fine has racked up to the point where the person just keeps it and walks away. In addition, it lets people who may need the library most and can't afford fines to remain as patrons in good standing.

One of those situations with conflicting aims and no perfect solution. It is why libraries will occasionally have "forgiveness" periods, when fines are wiped if you'll just bring back the book.

Let's be clear: I'm not excusing those who don't return books; at the same time it's the reality and the situation can be complicated. Punitive measures may not achieve the desired or the "best" result, whatever that's perceived to be.

I had a situation were the library said I owed them for some things I had borrowed. I disagreed but eventually gave in. When I went to get my card sorted, they didn't have a record of this and I didn't have to pay. I would have payed though.

I have gotten late fees waived before at my local branch. For example, when I was not well and unable to return on time. It pays to use the local branch a lot. Even though I was borrowing eBooks, I still used the local branch to look at new books, borrow movies on blu-ray, music and audiobooks on CD, and video games. So I still used the library a lot.

[Tomk2]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Who’s McMillan?

Oooops. There was less friction typing McMillan compared to Macmillan. LOL.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[FizzyWater]

Got a warning email from my local library system (which is not a great library for ebooks compared to a couple others I belong to) that beginning tomorrow, they will be "...choosing to no longer purchase newly released eBooks from Macmillan..." as a "stand against limiting equal access to our customers."

They do say they will "continue to purchase Macmillan titles that are not embargoed, including print materials, eAudiobooks and older copies of best-selling eBooks." But they don't define what they consider older copies.

Will they just wait til the 8 week period is up, or are any books sold beginning 11/1 on their "never buy" list now?

[Pizza_Cant_Read]

Just wanted to say thanks for posting this petition! I’m a bit late but glad I made it to the party

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

From a publisher's point of view, they know that book sales tend to be very front loaded, so they want to maximize books sales during that period. I also suspect, based on the fact that they used Tor as the experiment, the publisher isn't trying to protect the super best seller that everyone is talking about, but rather what I like to call the mid-tier author, the ones who have a nice steady record of solid selling books, i.e. 30K-50K with a few books that actually make the best seller list. They are the authors for whom a few thousand sales can make the difference between earning out and not earning out and they are the authors who represent the backbone of a publisher's business.

That would also tie in with the one perpetual copy. Those are benefiting the library as well as the publisher equally. Also that is priced lower means that there is less risk two ways. First it is a one time once paid, done and forget deal. Second it doesn't matter if it is unknown if there might be demand, or it is known that the demand is so low that a regular expiring license is too expensive. The publisher's benefit there is the never stopping eyeballs. If it is in the library, it appears to be a better book than the one that didn't get choosen.

[DNSB]

With the wait time being reduced to 8 weeks/56 days from the original 90 days that was being discussed and the 1 copy that can be purchased in that time being a perpetual copy, I'm finding this discussion rapidly losing interest for me.

Chatting with the staff at a local library, they would prefer no wait time but the perpetual copy is likely to be rather popular since they will no longer worry about the costs of keeping a copy of less popular ebooks.

[Tomk2]

I received an email to vote for the best books of this year. I looked at all the books in all the categories, and I had not read a single one of the nominees. I DID have three or 4 nominated books on my "to read" list, but I probably wont get around to them until next year. This illustrates that any embargo by publishers will not have an effect on me, cause me any frustration with my library, and it also will not alter my choice to borrow or buy when I do get around to reading the book.

I do understand why libraries dislike the policy and want to oppose it, and I also agree that the embargo is not a big deal for libraries. All that's left is for publishers to agree that the embargo boost is not large enough to generate negative publicity, time will tell if that is true or not.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

You're not alone, we're just rather outnumbered by those who like beating the publishers with sticks over anything they can.

It’s why the theaters loath Netflix for closing the exclusivity window.

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by Tomk2

thanks for the link: http://view.mail.macmillan.com/?qs=b...fc228e30a0ba99

It also doesn't bother me in the least that a library system will have to wait 8 weeks for more ebooks. However, I do think the Libraries feel they are being cut off from serving their clients, and having the community value the library due to the service they provide is the only way they library can survive. McMillans policy interferes with how libraries prefer to operate.

We’re book lovers. There’s always another for us to read.

But there are plenty of patrons who only show up when there’s something special (i.e. Obama biography or Oprah Book club release in the US) and the libraries want to serve them and keep them as patrons too, not annoy them.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by rem736

am i alone in thinking that it's reasonable for publishers to try and make money for just the first 8 weeks? this is the same thing that happens with movies in theatres. if they release dvds/blurays for purchase right away, theatre attendance will be reduced dramatically. why do you think publishers shouldn't do this? it's just for 8 weeks. is this too much to ask?

To me this is more like releasing the DVDs immediately, but withholding the captioned and audio-described DVDs.

I feel as though the "it's only eight weeks, get over it" is a bit of a furphy. I suspect this is one of the first sallies in an attempted boiling-frogs scenario, and I think librarians see that also.