How to use this Page

Can't wait to read the sequel, Morgan!

(Psst. There’s a little wonkiness in that Katherine Applegate link. I think you mean this.)

Oh! Usually I just link to PW Children’s Bookshelf since I can never figure out how to do the specific portions of their newsletter. I like this more, though. Cheers!

Great piece and great links – thanks, Betsy!

Great post, Kathy. I’m reposting on my blog verbatim with a link back here.

Things are changing quickly. I pitched a story to an agent at the NJSCBWI last year with a college-age main character. He told me that that age would not go over well with editors, and would I consider rewriting the character in High School instead. It’s very interesting that just a year later, his response might be different.

Hello, I enjoy reading all of your article post. I wanted to
write a little comment to support you.

It didn’t take you long to discover why pirated eBooks are so popular…SIMPLICITY!! I have a Sony Touch reader and use Calibre for my ebook manager. I’ve gotten a few free books from the Sony bookstore, but there again is the DRM issue. Can’t even move them to the Calibre library without removing DRM. I do like Smashwords. No DRM and you can download whatever format you want. If you need to change it to something else you can do it in Calibre. You purchased it and you can do whatever you want with it. And that’s the way it should be. Check out freebookspot.es. Not saying you should use it, but check it out. Now if it was this easy to check ebooks out of a library….Just to point out here, if I were to download and read a pirated book, that author or publisher would never have gotten a penny out of me anyway. I would have checked the paper format out of the library or bought it used from a used bookstore or from Amazon’s second hand book sellers. Maybe that’s just an excuse I make for myself, but it’s still the truth.

[...] Un bibliothécaire découvre son Kindle : le terrible cheminement pour trouver des ebooks gratuits, libres etc commence… Partagez cet article :PlusWordPress:J’aimeSoyez le premier à aimer ceci. Tagué 3e lieu, ebooks, réseaux sociaux, supports de lecture [...]

Another source of free ebooks is Smashwords.com, as mentioned above — all formats (including mobi, for kindles), and many authors have freebie loss-leaders. And, as mentioned, no DRM!

Glad to see someone else who notices and dislikes the flashy-page inversion thing. That requirement of e-ink tech drives me screaming inthe other direction. Fortunately, I don’t mind backlit screens, so phone & tablet work for me.

Thank you for posting your experience as a new Kindle owner. I’m currently in my last semester at an ischool and have thus far resisted getting an e-reader, partly because I still prefer the paper in my hands heft of a real book, but partly because I find the price to be very preventative. That said I too have been eying older version Kindles on ebay not that so many of the newer models are the popular buys. I appreciate you sharing your experience because it gives me an idea of what I will encounter if I purchase one, and because I appreciate your skepticism and willingness to talk about things like pirating as something other than pure evil. Ideally I’d love to be totally against pirating, but I also think that publishers and e-book providers need to find better ways of interacting with their customers and giving them the freedom to use the files the purchase as they see fit (ops mini rant). Any thanks again for sharing your experience, I found it really helpful and if I do get a kindle I will definitely be checking out some of those links you posted.

Same model as mine. Acquired summer of 2011 when in Ohio, got a Mark Twain/Walt Whitman cover made for it and, heck, must have used for a few thousand hours by now. Not just for books, but as another backup for basic web browsing and webmail – especially when in the open country – and for geocaching, for which it was unexpectedly useful in the midwest USA.

The eBooks section of the University of Adelaide has an impressive and growing collection of DRM-free classic books, of high production quality:

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/

Come on, Jessamyn. eBooks are easy.

Ah. I forgot the sarcasm tag.

eBooks could be easy, but I think publishers are still scared in general. I keep hoping they’ll come around to selling and distributing digital copies, like the music industry eventually did.

Hi, I’m a long-time Kindle user, but am new to circulating eReaders in a library. You mentioned that at your occasional you loan out devices to patrons. Do they borrow Overdrive items on them? I’m having trouble figuring out how to do this on a Kindle. We also have Sony readers but I haven’t gotten to those yet.

[...] I got a Kindle [...]

I use my smart phone as an e-reader because, for the most part, I’m against single-purpose digital devices. As the lines between eReader and tablet continue to blur, this may become less of an issue, but I do enjoy being able to read and turn pages with just one hand.

I tried to be a good ebook library user, but between the poor browsing experience and weird software and accounts required, I’ve mostly given up. These days if I’m not finding and downloading books through more libertarian channels, I tend to buy them. Like you, I try and avoid Amazon purchases, though I do frequent Google’s bookshop. Not necessarily the lesser of two evils, but Google pretty much knows more about me already than I do about myself, so I don’t know what further harm it could do.

You made a good choice Jessamyn!

Your version of the Kindle also has the voice function, something the newer ‘upgraded’ models have removed. While a little bracing the first time you use it, it soon becomes pretty natural and means you can ‘read’ even when you are doing chores around the house.

johnofjack – that chart is awesome! And I mean that sincerely – it’s great at demonstrating the ‘simplicity (not!)’ of ebooks – is it available for re-use? I’m putting together a libguide on ebooks and it would be perfect for adding some levity about the whole process

Karl – Sure, you can use it if you’d like. I made it on the clock, though, so it might be better if you credit it to Alachua County Library District rather than me directly.

It really is a wonderful image johnofjack, thanks for making it.

Thanks, Jessamyn. I’m glad it’s useful.

One of the greatest pleasures in life is browsing in a physical bookshop or library - picking up a book, turning the pages, feeling the smoothness of the paper under your fingers. E-books may have a place but they will never replace the tactile experience of "book" - and what happens when your magical electronic equipment breaks down?
There has to be a place for both but I think there will have to be legislation to prevent the sale of books for 20p. That has to come from us through our elected politicians in the end - and it is going to take a lot of work. I just hope we are up for the job!

I haven't a clue how it's to be fixed, but thank you for laying this mess out so clearly.

I'm with you on this, Lucy - I insist on keeping my ebooks priced far higher than 20p - believing that they are worth far more than that. I'm sure I'd sell more if they were cheaper - but hey ho, that's my choice.

I know someone who makes a point of only buying v cheap books - 20p or less - on the basis that if she doesn't like them she hasn't lost much. While i look to pay more, as I want to read writers who think like I do!

But as long as there is a free market in ebooks the prices will continue to be pushed down. It seems unlikely that any international body will ever have enough clout - or enough concern about this system - to challenge this. We live in a world where the market rules.

Which leaves it to writers to cling onto any principles they may have. And to readers to select books according to quality and not price. And to newspapers, magazines, etc to review as many sensibly-priced books as possible. And to schools to help children discover books of all genres, and hopefully cherish them enough to keep prices higher. We can dream.

And the very best of luck to Dan Holloway.

Sadly, I don't see anyone legislating against 20p books, catdownunder - it's not a vote-winner, is it? There are more readers than writers...

Lucy, I agree with you but feel there are a few reasons not to despair yet (unless they also allow resale of said e-books without a cut for author/publisher). We could all buy cheap crappy food from value ranges, but we don't. Perhaps paper books will become more of a premium item that, after the initial excitement of showing off about having a Kindle or an iPad, people will like to be seen with.

Also, when books are cheap I buy mpre. I buy books I wouldn't have bought at all. I might not ever read them, but they're useful to have around in case I'm stuck somewhere (like waiting in the Apple Store yesterday!) with nothing to do. If there is a book I specifically want, I order if from Foyles online (not Amazon) unless I happen to be in town and can go to the bookshop. So I wonder how many of the 20p books are actually bought by people who would never have bought the book at all? I don't expect people wait to see if the book they want is on a 20p deal in a few months. Thought I suppose there might be collateral damage - that people might not buy other books they would have bought because they already have enough to read? Not sure.

(But we know *plenty* of people who have rushed to plug their self-published e-books on Amazon at low prices or nothing 'to get sales/readers'. That's not something that started with commercial publishers.)

Lucy, while I completely agree that under-pricing leads to undervaluing and that that is a a bad thing in lots of ways, I still don't think you need to worry about the other aspects, viz the move away from physical books leading to disappearance of print books.

Your para beginning, "Just think about this for a moment. ...." BUT, how likely is it that the actual book he was desperate to read, (though not so desperate that he wouldn't just buy it in the bookshop or even on Amazon) is going to be the book in the daily deal? I agree that many people are drawn by price, but there are a whole load of readers who read because they want to read particular books and as long as they can afford them or borrow free from a library, they will. The 20p promotion is a good way to let people try things, but once desire has been created, people will pay a reasonable price.

I think if books are attractive enough and good enough and not TOO expensive, people will still buy them. The "you get what you pay for" theory, while by no means fool-proof, is powerful and very often true. Publishers are currently working hard and often very successfully to make books more attractive and desirable. Many publishers do a fantastic job from acquisition to production and then publicity. I've recently been drawn inexorably towards new books because of the elegant and genuine praise of them pre-publication, in all sorts of arenas. They are beautiful books, written and designed and edited beautifully.

By the way, I'm a Kindle owner but I enjoy reading on the Kindle far less than i did at first. I welcomed ebooks with open arms but now them only if I have to, for various functional reasons; they are not my vehicle of choice.

Sorry, I'm rambling and I'm also using anecdote/personal experience. I'm just saying, I don't think you need to worry too much about books! (Libraries, yes...) But I do agree that we need to be very careful what we give away too cheaply.

Thought-provoking post!

Stroppy and I are channelling...

Great post Lucy we need discussion about this because people will do what they want anyway but having informed discussion raises all sorts of issues that they may not have thought of.
I got a kindle recently and I do enjoy using it for lots of different reasons and I have bought cheap books I would not have paid more for. I also bought one that I had already read (part of a series I enjoyed and had previously borrowed from the library.) It reminded me how much I enjoyed it and I think I will be buying the paper copy of those in the series I don't actually own already.
I have been examining how I use the kindle. It has not decreased the pile of books bought recently to read in paper copies, but I have read quite a number of samples of books on the kindle, some of which I will not want to read, others I will want in paper copies, and some I might just buy if they come up as cheap books on the kindle.
I am not particularly keen to pay a lot for a book on my kindle because I would rather have the paper copy if I am paying more.
Not sure why that makes sense to me, but it does!
I was on the train the other day and I took a book with me rather than my kindle, but it was a slim copy - not heavy book!

I do think it is like when videos first came out and everyone said we would no longer be going to the cinema to see films. I think it will even out and people will use the kindle as an addition to and not instead of paper copies, but as to pricing, who knows where that is going.

Enjoyed this post and have shared it across onto the authors electric sites. Many independently publishing e-authors have been quietly raising the price of their products from the 99p levels of the early days and feel at least as threatened by the 20p promotions as trad published authors. Free promotions are not now seen as a route to success though some authors use them skilfully to promote their range of titles. The other development now in the world of indie authors is using Amazon's createspace technology to produce paper versions of e-titles. The quality of these is not unacceptable but of course they are only available through Amazon and there is little scope for a trade discount. I'm an independent writer publisher who publishes primarily on paper and sells through bookshops as well as Amazon. As an ex-bookseller I'm happy to say that my print sales still far exceed the electronic versions.

Lucy, thank you for linking to my post.

I would say a couple of things, because my post was about traditional publishing as much as self-publishing. I agree, traditionally published authors are somewhat at the mercy of publishers on this - but publishers do have choices, and we're already seeing small publishers ahve considerable critical and commercial success by positioning themselves to stand for quality and a host of other values - Peirene, for example, with their beautiful subscription packages, And Other Stories, whose exquisite books are sourced through reader collectives, Bluemoose promoting "non-metropolitan voices", Melville House almost single-handedly rebranding the novella, McSweeney's pusing the limits of what books can be. I think this is a trend that will continue (i've argues elsewhere that large trends tend to trigger smaller but significant oppositional trends, and I think this focus on quality, and on values is a natural reaction to the downward drive of ebooks).

I would add as a coda to this that it's not quite true that authors are simply flotsam. For years, those authors who wrote difficult to place, slightly awkward and non-standard books (the kind of thing now being championed by small presses) were told they had a simple choice - carry on doing it exactly as they wanted and carry on being un- or self-published or change and write what publishers wanted. It would be disingenuous, given there are small presses championing quality values, to claim that authors don't have the exact same option of changing what they write to appeal to them (though, as one of those who chose not to write for teh mainstream, I quite understand why people wouldn't want to change what they write - just that just as I was always told I was making a choice, so, in a way, are authors who stick to writing for the bg houses ).

My second point and I think the most fundamental point is about your comment:
"I do want to be fairly rewarded for my efforts, and that includes readers paying a reasonable price for my work."
Ignoring some of the usual points about what "fairly rewarded" means, I think it would be really good to start having an open and honest debate about whether there really is a necessary connection between the reward given to writers and the price paid by readers. It's so much taken for granted that there is that most times I mention it to people they look at me liek I'm stupid or have somehow missed the point, but I genuinely think it's possioble to go back to first principles and look again from scratch at the way writers are paid - there is a very interesting session on this at this year's Oxford Literary Festival that I think will raise some eyebrows (http://oxfordliteraryfestival.org/literature-events-2013/Tuesday-19/writing-and-publishing-on-line-a-new-age-for-fiction-and-poetry)

Hooray! This is exactly what I hoped would happen - a lively and informed discussion on the topic. Thank you all so much for joining in.

Crabbit - I think people will PROBABLY pay a reasonable price for print. My example of Mr Average was possibly a little disingenuous, but people do definitely shop around for the best prices - that's what all those comparison websites are for, and it's quite usual nowadays for shoppers to use a physical shop to examine a product, and then buy it more cheaply online. Because of the Amazon discount deals, books, however much we think they are different and special, are now seen as price-sensitive units, and 'the cheaper the better' mantra is still king of the consumer arena (except, currently, in the ready meal beef arena!).

It's interesting that Linda said she downloaded a book from a series she'd already read - and will now probably buy the series in print. On the e-book front, there is strong evidence that readers, if they like a newly discovered author, will want to read more of them, and will therefore be tempted to download a sequel immediately. I hope that some at least may decide that, like Linda, they'd rather have the books in print form and pay for that.

I've followed this discussion with interest, but the one thing that hasn't been mentioned is the fact that it is the traditional publishers who are putting up the 20p books. I had a quick check and I notice Ken Follett's Winter of the World is there just now, and I'm sure some books by Peter James have also been there. At the Harrogate Conference last year Peter said the author had no say in whether there books were offered at 20p, it was the publishers' decision. The lowest price an indie author can offer a book is 77p, or if they are part of the Select programme they have several free days, but the 20p book is not an option available to them.

Dan - thank you. You make some very good points and I wish I could go to that OLF session and hear what they have to say - I agree, it will be very interesting. I'd like to know a bit more about what you mean by 'going back to first principles' when it comes to the correlation between reward for writing and price paid by readers. Personally, I'm not going to write for love. I have a family to support and I need to earn from my writing. I know others here will feel the same way. Could you explain what you are suggesting about looking at it again from scratch, please? If there's another model which you think might work, it would be good to hear about it.

Oops, there's a typo in the last post - sorry! There should be their, comes from typing faster than my brain can think!

Sorry, Chris. I should have made that clearer in the piece. Yes, it's the publishers and Amazon who 'choose' the authors to go in the 20p promotions. The authors themselves have no say in it. I think my point about readers enjoying an author they've downloaded cheaply and then buying more books by them at a 'normal' price is what the publishers hope will apply here. It's all about volume of sales. I can see the logic, but my worries still apply!

Hi Lucy,

I meant simply asking the question whether the only way for writers to be paid for their work is by readers paying for their books as they do now. I don't have an answer but I think it's a question we don't think to ask because we have a model of "how it's done" so firmly in our heads. Philippe Aigirain, who's one of the panellists in Oxford, offers teh suggestion of legalising file-sharing and paying writers through collective licensing where everyone pays a small monthly amount for access to high speed broadband and out of that money content creators are paid per download. There are huge flaws in that but it's at least asking the question.

Thanks again, Dan. I see what you mean - we are pretty entrenched in the current system, and you're right - no one does question that because it is such a 'normal' equation. As you say, there are flaws in Phillipe's suggestion - and, of course, it would only work for downloadable material, not for print. I'm going to go away and cogitate now - much food for thought, and, I think, many more questions to answer.

Very interesting post, Lucy, and as you say, much food for thought. It would be interesting to see the volume of sales of other books by an author who has had a book on the 20p list - traditional print editions and as ebooks.
I occasionally buy books for my kindle, which I have to say I love, but I buy far more proper printed books (yes, my house is groaning under the weight of them!). The kindle is reserved for books that I know no one else in my family will read. I also download sample chapters of books, which is uesful as a writer.
My teenager has an iPad, but never reads ebooks on it - it's all about bookshops and printed books. The same goes for almost all his friends, girls and boys alike. Or they use the library...
I'm sure all that will change eventually, but it hasn't got there yet.
Young adults, however, do buy more ebooks than teens.

A storyville documentary on the google books project (on the BBC last night) looked at some of these broader questions raised here - who does knowledge in books belong to and who should pay for it? Where are the limits of the public domain? Is the idea of copyright and royalties still workable in the digital age? It's on iplayer and well worth watching.

Stroppy makes the point that no one's going to legislate against 20p deals because there are more readers than writers. But I'm inclined to think no one's going to legislate because there are so many writers all competing for sales. There is so much material being produced and made available through digital means. Of course it is devalued as a result.

Sadly I think it does mean the end of the paper book, in the long term. They will linger on in a niche market of gift books and illustration-heavy books, much like vinyl records have done, but the mass market of fiction will move almost totally to ebook format. Publishers too will become very different beasts; they will still exist, but will consist of only a handful of Editors and sub-editors arbitrating over quality and the content of lists - they will be the badges of credibility that will help authors to stand out in a world where self-publishers seem almost to outnumber readers.

I give the paperback 20 more years at most. I almost said 10.

Nick, there is a *huge* difference between the book/e-book and the LP/download pairs. All the methods of accessing music and videos require electronic or electrical equipment. You can't look at record and hear the music. A paper book is the only delivery method in any of this debate which requires no technology on the part of the end-user. All you need is daylight (or electric/candle-light). When one technological delivery method supersedes another it is because it offers something superior. In the book/e-book arena, it only offers something different.

I am not sure where we are going with this at all, except that it feels most ominous. The free or low price offers feel a false and dangerous trail to follow but I am not sure what can be done about it.

I am happy to read "series" books on my kindle when I need an escapist fix. I recently enjoyed several Donna Leon's while stressed by other things.

However I do find e-books poor vehicles for any reading that requires a sense of study or concentration or subtle pleasure and have begun buying books in preference to e-books when the book "matters".

I also don't like the fact that I can't pass on or share a book even if that is being made possible.

I thought what Philip Jones of Futurebook had to say in the digital bit of the Bookseller today was very measured, and certainly relevant to this discussion, so am quoting him liberally below:

"A black and white view of the future is actually fairly simple to imagine, which is perhaps why many pioneers come across as zealots. Books will be digital, and those books that are not digital will simply no longer get put in motion. The old ways must bend to the new. Digitalists can then spend their time arguing over enhancements, subscriptions models, DRM, free, and social. Those library users who still want access to published content can simply use the web; or download free e-books from Google's giant 'brain'.

But in debating the future we should try not to take polarised positions, simply because they do not reflect the world as it is. A muddle.

It is likely that a much trickier future will emerge than the one imagined, if it hasn't already. Digital will need to find space along with physical (and yes, vice versa). Business models will need to make sense of both. We will need to supply reading material in lots of different ways, some of them using concepts and materials from the Victorian age. Some things will fall away for sure, but not all things, and there is scant evidence that one of those things that needs to disappear is the library.

Digital changes everything, of course, but it need not kill everything."

The world is indeed a muddle, but we will get through it somehow!

Connected, though, not the same, is the question of the traditionally published author's royalty level on an e-publication. Not a problem for the independent author who will typically be getting 70% on a properly priced book, though paying all his or her own costs. But the traditionally published author is expected to take 20% on an e-book which has NOT cost the publisher very much in the way of production. Chris Longmuir wrote about this in her AK blog today http://www.authorselectric.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/ebooks-are-authors-being-ripped-off.html

(sorry AE, not AK = Authors Electric. The light's fading and I'm too lazy to get up from desk and flick the switch. Will now LEAVE the desk and deal with the animals while there's still a glimmer outside.)

Thanks for that link, Julia. What Chris says is spot on - I've commented on her AE post, but I will say here that the whole e-royalty for traditionally published authors is a mess, and needs sorting fast, or there will be a lot of resentment around (well, there already is!).

I have to say I love reading on my Kindle. I am reading a paper book at the moment, but only because I couldn't get the book on Kindle, and I'm finding the smallness of the print and the stiffness of the book's spine infuriating.
I find the Kindle preferable for research reading - easier to mark places and find them again, and easier to find the book I want!
That said, I do think the immediate future is pretty gloomy.
Every revolution crushed somebody. The Ind Rev resulted in thousands of skilled, independent handloom weavers being ruined.
I think, eventually, the industry will sort itself out, when they realise that killing the goose that lays the shiniest golden eggs is bad business. How long that will take, and how many writing careers will go to the wall before it happens, is anyone's guess.
Personally, I see the 21st Century equivalent of the Workhouse looming before me...So it goes.

'So the thing I worry about most is what is currently happening to the perception of the value of a book.' I can't agree more. Not just as an author [I too earn my living as a writer, or not as the case may be] but as a reader. It's not good for my reading self to see books as cheap fodder rather than the inestimable treasures that they really are. What we need is a campaign to shout about the true value of a book and the powerful and lasting impact it has on a person's life. No artist would expect to give away their life's work for a few pence. Readers shouldn't expect to buy a writer's life's work for a few pence. Dan Holloway's idea of going back to first principles and thinking about how writers are paid is an interesting one, and timely too. Gggrrrr. These 20p jokers make me so FURIOUS. And as my Project Gutenberg piece said, earlier this month, so do the free giveaways too.

I use the Kindle Android app on my smartphone to search and buy ebooks from Amazon. Using the this app and having a small screen means I get less information on potential books and what really stands out when searching is the number of reviews and stars (you can search by minimum number of stars). I suspect traditional publishers may be trying to increase the number of readers, and therefore reviews and stars, by offering 20p books.

I won't buy ebook novels at paperback prices unless it's by a favourite author. However, I have been buying lots more books than I would normally buy, simply because very cheap ebooks mean I'm willing to experiment more.

By the way, I still won't buy ebooks of illustrated books, non fiction and reference books, and poetry books.

I don't know if you saw this, Lucy? Another interesting idea to throw in the mix
http://publishingperspectives.com/2013/02/will-pay-as-you-read-allow-publishers-to-charge-more-for-ebooks/

Another excellent link, Dan - and, again, food for thought. If this pay-as-you-read model does work and become the norm (though I can't see it happening on a large scale for a while, if ever), then perhaps we will return to a Dickensian world where the chapter-end cliffhanger is what has to be mastered by every author. I suppose in a way this is what is happening on the WattPad site, where (as I understand it) authors will only publish the next chapter of their book if enough people have liked/read the previous one.

Fascinating thread to which I come late and to which I don't have anything intelligent to add! I am quite quite sure of one thing though: the printed book WILL survive whatever is thrown at it. In some form or other. It's simply too well designed and too fit for purpose and too BEAUTIFUL as well as useful to disappear. As for the payment for ebooks, 20 p books on Kindle and the like: I KNOW NOTHING!!

I made a list of the top 20 Kindle titles today, and most of them are on the 20p promotion (which is only available to traditional publishers, as others here have noted). How the author makes "hundreds of thousands" is unclear, since out of 20p there can't be much royalty left once publishers, agents, and amazon have had their cut!

I price my backlist ebooks at £2-99. I think low prices are fine for promotions, but should be used sparingly to avoid cheapening the content. Trouble is, once one publisher does it...

...and having just read some of the other comments above, I think there is a danger in pricing low to attract readers who might not otherwise read that kind of book. They might hate it and review accordingly! I've downloaded a few 20p mistakes already, so now I won't download even at that price until I've read the sample.

No. Unless the author/publisher was getting compensation for teh book, that would be acceptable. If they did do it, thye dhuld not allow indie or self published books to be resold

It's going to be awfully hard for writers to make a living if, in theory, a hundred people can read the same copy of a book with no compensation for the author. This isn't like a library or even a used book store full of paperbacks, in my opinion. I really don't like it. :-(

This is yet another reason why I think the consumption of all digital media (books, movies, music) is better off switching from a own-per-unit to a subscription model, since ownership of intangible data is so...fuzzy.

It would make these debates moot.

Instead of buying individual pieces of media and 'owning' them, instead you'd pay a fixed monthly fee for unfettered access to the library of media.

You're never watching 'your' Finding Nemo DVD, you're just renting it on demand any time you want. Ditto, you're never reading 'your' copy of 'Wolf Hall', you're just renting it on demand every time you open it on your Kindle.

I would *love* to pay $15 or whatever to read as many books in a month as I want.

Seems insane. How would you ever make any money?

I am so conflicted on this, because I've *always* thought that DRM and its associated restrictions hurts electronic sales--the ONLY time I will pirate or jailbreak a song or movie is when I flat-out can't do what I want with the file (put it on my nook and iPad at once, etc). Otherwise, paying money for the content is both easier and keeps viruses off my computer.

So I've championed publishers like Tor and many self-publishers, who are trying to go forward with DRM-free versions of their books to give their readers the greatest flexibility possible.

At the same time, it's one thing to have DRM-free items that you can read on any reader or give away, versus creating a secondary book market for ebooks. Amazon already makes it super easy to get rid of old media for an Amazon gift card--how soon will they begin compensating people for "returning" their ebooks? And with nothing to incentivize purchasing the new version (no dog ears, no underlining), the vast majority of people won't pay more for exact the same thing--and, I would wager, that even includes people who understand the author gets no payment for the "used" copy.

In addition, there won't be the "secondhand shipper" problem with the used ebook--usually you have to pay $4 shipping for a used book because the used book retailer isn't part of Amazon or bn.com. It will make it easier to buy used.

The whole thing leaves me wondering if this is not just another attempt to drive down the price of new ebooks. The problem is, as usual, such tactics will disproportionately squeeze midlist authors who don't get giant pre-orders of their new titles.

Obviously, this is a dangerous innovation. The only way the author doesn't get screwed in this is if there's a secondary-reader royalty rate established, much like the royalty credits for songwriters. An author would get full credit of royalties on a books initial purchase, a .75 credit on secondary purchase, etc. etc.

There would also have to be some sort of time delay on the ability to resell e-books. For instance, a three or six month delay after initial publication date, that way authors aren't seeing their profit capabilities undermined by fast readers or unsatisfied customers.

And there has to be a limit on how many times an e-book file can be resold. That way there can still be sufficient demand vs. supply to maintain profits for authors.

Well, since the comments on Scalzi's post have pretty much already run the gamut on this, I really have nothing to add...except that my gut reaction was: "So, Amazon is trying to monetize piracy now?"

There's a fundamental flaw in the argument against the resale of ebooks: Where's the uproar over the resale of physical books? Authors don't get any of that money, do they? In reading Amazon's patent, it's clear that once a person sells a bit of digital content, it's not theirs to have any more, unless they buy it again -- the same with physical books. The patnent also says they'll impose limits on the number of times a bit of digital content can be re-sold. Where content creators -- from authors to publishers -- ought to get aggressive in the digital resale market is not to try to quash it outright, but to try to get a slice of the pie in what appears will be a tightly-run marketplace, where Amazon's sales at least will be handled in a manner that should make collecting resale royalties a simple matter.

I think we already compensate buyers for the reduced shareability of e-books with a lower price point. You can buy it cheap, but you can't resell it or lend it (except by lending your device). Ownership has been redefined in the digital age.

I just bought Word 2013 from Microsoft, but what did I buy? A bunch of digital information streamed to my computer. Even the days of "I went to Seattle and all I got was this lousy CD" are over. The licensing model is now simply a fact of life in the digital age.

People want the best of both worlds: the advantages and cheapness of digital files along with the advantages of a physical paper product. But you can't have both. If you want a copy you can sell or lend, buy a paper copy. If you have an ereader and like digital (and digital savings), go that way.

Tout finis.

To me, a "used" e-book is just a copy. I don't quite see it the same way as me taking the physical book I paid for, and reselling it (or giving, or loaning, or whatever). I guess if there is a mechanism for ensuring that I no longer have it, there is room for discussion; otherwise it just seems like illegal copying.

My question is, "Do authors and publishers get paid when a book is sold used?" If the technology is to be used as you have described it, wouldn't it be the same for the author/publisher of an e-book?

My thought is, if the technology to pass on ownership of an e-book exists, wouldn't it create an opportunity for the author/publishers to demand to be compensated for the re-sale of the e-book?

How are authors/publishers compensated for e-books in the Amazon Prime lending program? If they are paid (albeit at a lower royalty rate), maybe it could be used as a payment model for the re-sale of the e-books.

Obviously, Amazon's practices have created reason for the content creators to distrust their every move. However, they have also opened up opportunities for authors to realize their dreams to finally become published.

On the other hand, I would love to see a subscription type service as proposed by Lauren B at 12:29.

My first reaction was Yikes. No Way! But after reading some of the suggestions posted, I can see there are some compatible alternatives such as Lauren B.'s subscription model and Isaiah's idea of placing a time restraint before you can resale and/or the number of resales. (I really like this one.)

Nevertheless, if the author and publisher aren't being compensated then there are definately issues that need to be addressed before Amazon moves foreward, if they decide to do so.

Might as well just blog and give the story away for nothing. At least that way you don't have to pay for a cover and editing.

I think the best thing to do is to sell eBooks as a package with the real books. I want to own the hard copy, but I don't want to also have to buy the eBook. I'd gladly pay a little more on the normal price of a book if it included both. I don't like the idea of reselling 'used' eBooks, because like you say, there is nothing truly 'used' about them.

I think reselling ebooks would be fine as long as authors get a royalty each time the book sells. It wouldn't be right for Amazon (or any seller) to make money without compensating the creator.

Electronic files and hard copy books are apples and oranges-- or maybe apples and blue jeans. They aren't the same thing and it's ridiculous to pretend they are.

I guess some LIMITED version of passing it on--you read it, then gift it to someone--that would match how a lot of readers use books, fits what I make sense. I don't think you should be able to sell one (though I suppose if you made a private deal for the gifting, that is up to you) but once it is gifted, it can't be gifted again, and if it was a 'promotional' version (free or seriously discounted) then the 'gifting' could be removed if the author/publisher decided.

Or maybe the gifting (or a few extra rounds of borrowing) would be an add-on purchase the original eBook purchaser could buy... it is $2.99 but for $3.99 you can lend it up to three times or gift it when you're done.... something like that.

Nathan wrote: For me personally, it's hard to wrap my head around what a "used" digital files even means. A digital copy does not get worn, the pages don't yellow over time, there are not dog-eared corners. A "used" digital copy is exactly like a brand new digital copy. The idea of "used" digital anything is pretty meaningless.
-------
I saw Scalzi's response and reposted it around because it was a thoughtful rant (and I'm a professional writer with e-books and audiobooks too).

But when I saw this item on the problem, I remembered one other thing that makes "used" print books more valuable than pristine ones.

If a famous person (or subsequently famous person) has annotated a book with underlines and/or marginal comments, or if the author him/herself has added marginalia -- THAT copy becomes more valuable than a clean print copy.

One feature with Amazon Kindle that I'm using is the "share" feature that lets you highlight and "share" (with folks "following" you on Amazon Share who also have that book) snatches of text from the book.

The only books where I've seen others sharing text excerpts are some Harry Potter.

You can also insert a "comment" on shared text.

Those shares are not "attached" to your copy, but to the title. Anyone who has that title and is following you can see your shares. You can also post shared excerpts to Facebook and twitter.

Reading is becoming a social networking experience.

It's possible Amazon plans to develop something that allows you to sell "used" copies with access to some commentary by (whoever?).

Or maybe they just want to be sure nobody else can if Amazon doesn't do this?

First of all, the author has been paid for that sold book. Should the author then be paid again for the same book that has been purchased? If that's the case, then library book sales would be highly illegal. Second hand bookstores wouldn't have a business. Authors will find every reason to try to make a dime on everything they can.

Does Calvin Klein get money on clothing that is sold at a goodwill or Salvation Army? No, he's already been paid for the sale of the clothing. Same thing with ebooks. Once the book is purchased, it should be able to be sold back or resold. Now, I'm anti-Amazon, so I don't think they should make a profit off of it. Maybe collect a fund to help save libraries or something. Which yeah, I know will never happen.

I'll probably piss off a lot of authors, but really should you make double off of one book every time it switches hands?

This would be a disaster for both publishers and writers. It might be disastrous for Amazon too if their profits from used digital eBooks don't compensate them for the loss of writers who will flee to sites where their eBooks can only be "rented" rather than purchased. Unless Amazon is confident that they have such a large market share that their position is unassailable, they may want to make sure their author's pocketbooks stay full enough to keep them from being lured away.

Laura @6:31:

Well, I'm not pissed off, but I am scratching my head at your reasoning.

You said that "the author has been paid for that sold book. Should the author then be paid again for the same book that has been purchased?"

However, what has been sold was not the book, rather what has been sold is the right to read the book digitally on your e-reading device. We aren't talking about an item which loses value once it has been accessed, such as a car rolling off a lot or a pair of pants. We are talking about the intellectual property of a written manuscript, as well as the art (if applicable).

By the same logic, music, once purchased, should be free to be distributed in all avenues without any compensation to the songwriters and artists. And if you purchase a CD, that is applicable. However, when a song is played in a venue, streamed on the internet, or even covered by another band and sold, the artist is paid royalties for his intellectual property.

The same should be true of books. Certainly, a book which suffers wear and tear after an initial read and is then resold has diminished its value to such an extent that it poses no great threat to the sales of an author's work. But an e-book, which does not diminish in value for any reason except perhaps time, poses a great threat to the author if it can be acquired at a cheaper price by cutting out the royalties.

In other words, an author's got to eat.

Isaiah Campbell:

In other words, an author's got to eat.

If I had a dollar for every time I heard that saying. Lawyer Milloy said the same thing when he wanted more millions from the New England Patriots. They traded him.

Why shouldn't we treat e-books as physical books? We pay just about the same amount for most of them. Considering it costs next to nothing to upload a document to site.

I also don't like "However, what has been sold was not the book, rather what has been sold is the right to read the book digitally on your e-reading device. We aren't talking about an item which loses value once it has been accessed, such as a car rolling off a lot or a pair of pants. We are talking about the intellectual property of a written manuscript, as well as the art (if applicable)."

If I'm paying $20 (The Casual Vacancy) for the right to READ a book, then I might as well just buy the damn hardcover and be done with e-books all together, because according to you, I'm basically renting it anyway?

I'm not trying to take money away from an author, I'm trying to help the consumer who gets completely lost in this myriad of challenges of the digital world. Scratch your head, but eventually there will be a backlash.

So all the books I've purchased for my Nook, I don't own, I've just been given the "right" to read it?

No. It's hard for authors as it is to make any money on hard copies. Especially first time writers to get a break. I say stick to the hard copy books. I have my first novel available through Amazon and Barnes and Noble and both have asked if I would consider ebook. I said no...more money for them and minimal to zero for the author.

If authors aren't being compensated for the reselling, then there have to be some sort of boundaries set. Otherwise, no one will want to go through the hassle of getting published. What if, if you bought it used but then could not resell it. So you can pass it on, but it can only be passed on once. I also agree with the poster who said there should be some sort of time limit on how soon you could resell it so that it wouldn't bite into new book sales.

DRM is annoying if you can't get a book on to your own device, but other than that, I think it serves a purpose.

This is an issue only because publishers are fighting a rear guard action to maintain the price of ebooks in the ballpark of paper books. This, despite the lack of major costs such as printing, storage, shipping, and returns. A similar situation existed in the early days of PC software when common programs sold for hundreds of dollars. Piracy was rampant. Now, these programs are sold for twenty or thirty dollars, with benefits of online support, and the frequency of piracy is far, far less.

If ebooks commonly sold for a couple of dollars apiece I doubt that a market for used ebooks would exist.

For Laura and those confused about this whole issue.

When you resell a used paper book, you are selling the paper, the ink, and the glue, NOT the content. That is called "The First Sale Doctrine." In fact, you never owned the content of the book. You never had the right to reprint the contents of the book, or sell it as a screen play, or anything else like that.

A digital book is only the contents. If you'd bother to check out the small print when you buy an ebook, you'd see that you aren't buying it, you are licensing the content, and what you can and can't do with that content is included, usually in the DRM information. That usually means you can't loan an ebook, you can't resell an ebook, and you can't post it online for free.

For more details and links to government laws and information on the subject, read my articles on copyright:


“A Reader’s Guide to Copyright,” A simple explanation of what copyright is and what the reader needs to know.

http://mbyerly.blogspot.com/2009/03/readers-guide-to-copyright.html


“The First Sale Doctrine and Ebooks,”  Is it legal to resell or share an ebook?

http://mbyerly.blogspot.com/2009/04/first-sale-doctrine-and-ebooks.html

You can also see my articles on the Kindle used ebook system and what used ebooks outside of a Kindle system would mean for publishing, writers, and readers by clicking on the "copyright " label.

Patents are tricky. For example, there was a patent on something called the Berger Lamp for a long time. It's an infuser that takes impurities from the air and add scent to a room. They were very expensive for a long time because of this patent. When it ran out, everyone started selling them and they became more afforadable.

With that said, the odds are Amazon acquired this very important patent to keep others from selling used e-books. Whether or not Amazon will implement this is another question. Many large corporations acquire patents and never use them. They just want to hold them so no one else can use them. If that's the case, it's another brilliant move on Amazon's part.

However, if they want to start selling used e-books, and if authors are not going to get royalties, they are playing a different game now than they were with used print books. Authors and publishers can offset this by selling their own "used" e-books at a fraction of the cost. Or, authors could actually give away these books for free and cut Amazon completely. If it is done, it will create a large stir. But I don't see it happening anytime soon. Now, if one of the big six had been paying attention, they would have acquired the patent and never used it so Amazon wouldn't get it. But Amazon, as usual, is on top of everything.

Obviously, this won't happen. It would actually destroy Amazon's book business, which would do immense harm to their business as a whole.
Seriously... there'd be no ebooks produced, apart from a few rubbish ones by desperate self publishers.
No publisher who needs to make money – which is most publishers – will produce ebooks if this starts happening.
It won't be able to happen to previously sold books, because they weren't sold, only the license to download and read them was sold. So we who've bought them so far can't resell them.
So.
How would this work if it were to be implemented?
Some numbers.
Numbers are good.
Best case scenario for author/publisher...
Consumer buys $10 ebook from Amazon. Author/publisher share $7 however their contract states. Amazon make $3.
Consumer reads book, sells it back to Amazon for, say $4. Attractive deal for consumer. It only cost her $6 for the book.
Amazon sells the "used" copy, which is a faultless brand new copy of course, for, say $8.
Consumer loves this. Gets $10 book for $8. Amazon makes $4 on second-hand copy. More than they made on the new one.
At this point Author/publisher have made $7, and Amazon have made $7 from that one copy.
2nd owner of book sells it back to Amazon for $4.
Turned out a good deal for 2nd owner. It only cost them $4 to read the book.
Amazon sells it to 3rd Consumer for $8.
Amazon has now made a profit of $11 on a book that sells for $10 new.
Much more than the publisher and author combined.
At this point one book has profited the producers of the book.
Repeat forever.
So the publisher/author would sell very few copies of an ebook, and as this production would ensure a loss rather than a profit, they would not produce any ebooks at all, only print books.
Amazon would only try this if their ultimate goal was to stop ebooks being produced.
Probably not Amazon's business model is it?

You can't sell "used" music files on itunes, and I doubt this will ever come to fruition either. Since you've really just bought a license to read a book's content, not bought the book itself, it doesn't make sense to sell "used" e-books.

I heard on the news a couple of weeks ago about a library in Texas that has gone all digital -- it's reportedly the first digital library in the country. They will have a physical location, but it'll be a place where people can go and use Kindles, Nooks, etc. I guess that means they're going to loan e-books.

Libraries have to buy books in order for their patrons to check them out. Is it possible for publishers to work with libraries or maybe even come up with a new model for consumers to be able to share their "used" ebooks and the publishers still reap some benefit?

No, no, no, no, no. This is not cool.

Being a part of the anti-DRM crowd, I have to say it's not the same thing, either (not saying you said that, just ...).

Pirates will still pirate, and people who understand that we must financially support creative works if we want more cool creative works will still pay.

The only difference is who gets the money. I'd rather see it going to writers and publishers than digital distribution behemoths like Amazon. As much as I love Amazon, and I shop there a lot, they've already taken a big enough piece of the publishing pie.

I'm confused how this 'technology' differs from Kindle Direct Publishing, in which Amazon Prime members can "lend" books to others, in a "lending library," all digital and virtual, with no extra compensation to the writers?

On the other hand, do writers/publishers currently get some compensation for resale of their books, by either used book stores or even, for example, the bookstores that buy and sell textbooks?

Perhaps the time has come to allow such virtual resale, with some compensation from the seller going to the writer, again? I see no reason, in the digital world, why the publisher needs to benefit from resales suddenly if they haven't until now...:)

But I share your concern/confusion as well. Since a "digital" used book is essentially the same as a new one, I can see the incentive among, say, Kindle users to keep or reopen some memory on their devices--the equivalent of clearing unwanted used books from your shelves--and get compensated.

But not the writers or publishers?
:)

Here's a new twist on the issue: ReDigi is a company also looking to get into the used e-books sale. But with their sales, authors and publishers would get a cut with every sale--and that's part of what makes it even legally trickier, because giving the author and publisher a cut sort of violates the "Right of First Sale" doctrine. (Source: Publishers Weekly, "Sale of Used E-Books Getting Closer," Judith Rosen Feb. 16 2013.)

If an e-book is going to be resold, I'd rather the author and publisher get a cut. As a reader starving for more books but keeping an eye on a too-short budget, I like the idea of more affordable reading. I'll pay full-price for authors I know I like, but if I'm looking for a new author, or faced with an intriguing book from an unknown? I'm more likely to buy if it's cheap enough I can still spend the extra on an author I know I love.

But as a writer, I will pay full price to support other authors whose works I know I like, whenever I can afford to buy new. The conundrum comes when facing the question of whether or not most other people will, too.

I think it's such a complicated question because the impulse is to try to create the ebook market in the image of the paperback book market.

Not sure that can be done because, as you point out, the two are such different animals and yet, as a reader I do want to be able to treat my digital books just like my paperback ones, loan them to friends etc.

At the moment, pre-coffee, I don't have a great solution to offer, but thanks for giving me something interesting to think about on this rainy Friday.

This comment has been removed by the author.

I don't think this conversation should overlook what happened with the shift in music and piracy. Conceptually, the music industry didn't mind if I made a copy of a cd for a friend for free (peer to peer was ok). This was in no way controversial, and completely impossible to regulate. The issue really was when strangers were introduced to the equation with mp3 sharing. I think it's reasonable to understand why that is controversial.

So with my ebooks (as with all my content), I feel like I should be able to transfer my license (for a fee or for free) to someone within my network (there should be an easy way to regulate this - immediate family and an approved list of friends in order to limit it so everything isn't available to all my facebook friends), and I'm ok not having the right to do the same with a stranger.

Also, if we look at the developments in dvds over the last decade, we've seen how the studios are including enhanced content that's only available if you buy the movie or tv show. If ebook licenses do become transferable, we may start to see enhanced content available only to the first buyer - a way to incentivise the purchase. Also, probably windowing so the original purchaser couldn't transfer their license immediately.

Assuming that Amazon is attempting to offer the ability to re-sell Kindle-formatted books across Kindle devices, then they do actually have the ability to ensure that the original "owner" no longer retains a copy. They control the content and the cloud and can make sure that you remove all locally downloaded copies before re-selling.

(Yes, yes, rooted/jail-broken devices and PC's used by slightly more tech-savvy folks could easily be used to cicumvent the issue...just as with DRM and DVD copying and all that).

Now, having said that, I suspect that Amazon is first going to use this to scare sense into publishers who attempt to charge hardcover prices for new e-books (actually, I think the fact that this is getting publicity IS their scare attempt). If the publishers are going to insist on charging paper prices for electronic content, then perhaps the electronic content should come with the same resale rights as the paper.

If Amazon has the patent on the technology, and finds the legal right to do so, they could easily threaten to allow re-sale of those overpriced books. If you were a publisher, what would you do?

Also, digital content CAN age, can deteriorate, can become obsolete. Anyone have a PC game sitting on 5 1/2" floppy disks? Think you're going to play that again someday?

I'm not saying that I agree one way or another on whether this is good. Just suggesting a potential motivation.

No, I'm not reselling the paper, ink, and the glue. I am reselling the content if I resell a paper book. Because when I go to the thrift store or used book store, I am not buying a collection of glue, ink, and paper. I'm buying the content. I'm buying the book. I'm buying what the author wrote at a price point I can afford and in a manner that authors and publishers have no control over. Consequently, when I buy an ebook, I'm not buying a collection of zeroes and ones, I'm buying the content. To say otherwise is silly, no matter what the proper definition of publication rights might be.

I've always thought e-books should function like movies. Buy the book outright for $10-$20, or rent the book (for 21 days) for $3.99-ish. I get a lot of my e-books now through Overdrive, but I hate waiting. I would gladly pay 4 bucks to avoid the wait, but not thrilled about paying $15 for a book I'll read once and forget about.

Interesting question and comments.

I sort of feel like doing a 'wait and see' on this. For example, Amazon may never use the patent - as a commentor above said, they may just be tying up the rights.

If it does try re-sales, it may reimburse authors for them. There's no reason why it wouldn't, it gives the bulk of every sale to the indie author (and quite abit to the publisher) anyway. Amazon does not appear to be interested in bilking the author.


And/or - Amazon may decide to offer subscription for used book exchanges.

Or - It may ask authors to participate voluntarily, like Prime. Some authors might agree for the discoverability.

Or - Amazon may not even know what Amazon is going to do yet. :)

Should be interesting!

In different news, I'm halfway through the new Jacob book, Nathan. Wow, fast paced and fun. Loved the 'elephant in the room' - too clever, Nathan. :D