Why do you think so? Apple seems to be at war with just about every high tech company out there (Kodak, Nokia, Google, Amazon, Microsoft etc.). Is it because of the Jobs' negotiating skills?
That's every high tech company? (add Palm and Adobe, btw)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad Helping Book Publishers Gain More Control Over eBook Pricing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's every high tech company? (add Palm and Adobe, btw)
Since this topic has seemed to engender a lot of heated debate, can I just ask a simple question:
How many here either regularly read or plan to read digital books?
I ask simply about of curiosity. My interest in the topic at this point is purely academic, since I only purchase bound books. I'm a gadget freak as much as the next person here. But when it comes to books, I just like the idea of paper.
There is a convenience factor that is enticing. But, as with my music, I'd much rather have a physical piece of media that I own and can re-use as I see fit (within the bounds of the law, of course).
How many here either regularly read or plan to read digital books?
I ask simply about of curiosity. My interest in the topic at this point is purely academic, since I only purchase bound books. I'm a gadget freak as much as the next person here. But when it comes to books, I just like the idea of paper.
There is a convenience factor that is enticing. But, as with my music, I'd much rather have a physical piece of media that I own and can re-use as I see fit (within the bounds of the law, of course).
Too bad you have such a small experience. There are so many scenarios that are illegal just because the current law makes them illegal.
Things as simple as downloading a song, and then trying to play on a third party device, or in another operating system. Things like being able to back up your own physical media, just in case. I could go on all day.
Back on topic, I found this comment on Engadget:
I do, on my iPhone. I find that I read more since I can whip out the phone and read when I have a spare half hour here and there.
DRM hurts paying customers more than pirates or file sharers. A digital copy of anything you want (stripped of DRM) is only a torrent away. I would like to put my purchased Blu rays on my computer for streaming in my house and for my laptop on the road. It would honestly just be easier to download them. Some games have install limits, but what is the point when torrents are available as soon as the game is released (and sometimes earlier)?
DRM is not being used to prevent piracy, it is being used to control consumers. If it wasn't to control consumers, why don't we have universal DRM standards? All movies utilizing the same form DRM and playable on iTunes, WMP, and your PS3 or any other device/program adhering to the standard? Kindle eBooks usable on other ereaders?
I'm sorry not everyone can recognize this and are stuck in the pirates are bad so DRM is ok mindset.
PS: Why are there licensing fees to playback DRM'd Blu rays? Quite simply, DRM is a business.
True. And it's also used because suits in the content production/distribution industries (not authors, directors, etc.) have a hard time accepting change. DRM is like a safety blanket for them, one that gives them comfort while it smothers and suffocates paying customers.
The more progressive-thinking folks in these lines of work know that DRM actually kills off more business than it promotes. But the older guys haven't yet caught on. They're afraid to rethink their business models in the age of broadband.
How about a slightly different perspective?
I've dealt and collected books since I was a kid, and as such I very, very seldom buy a brand new book from any retailer, be it Amazon, or any of the brick-and-mortar chains.
In the digital world, what I do would be considered piracy. Virtually none of the money I spend on media goes to the artists, or their publishers. Yet I am almost always able to attain what I want to consume. Am I wrong to expect some of the same perquisites in the digital realm, and if so why? And if I am to relinquish some of those rights, why shouldn't I expect concessions from those who would limit me from their expression?
As for piracy, well, welcome to the world corporatism made. Every man for himself right? Karma is seldom so delightfully poignant.
I've dealt and collected books since I was a kid, and as such I very, very seldom buy a brand new book from any retailer, be it Amazon, or any of the brick-and-mortar chains.
In the digital world, what I do would be considered piracy. Virtually none of the money I spend on media goes to the artists, or their publishers. Yet I am almost always able to attain what I want to consume. Am I wrong to expect some of the same perquisites in the digital realm, and if so why? And if I am to relinquish some of those rights, why shouldn't I expect concessions from those who would limit me from their expression?
As for piracy, well, welcome to the world corporatism made. Every man for himself right? Karma is seldom so delightfully poignant.
I do read e-books but it's usually from free sources like this,
http://manybooks.net/
which many formats including ePub by the way.
one more thing I do on my iPhone when waiting or traveling.
I prefer real books too. The only real attraction is searchable, indexed tech books, but usually those I usually obtain as PDF's because it's not about pleasure then.
That's pure BS.
The public library is a horrible place to go for free internet access. It's slow and unreliable and I never enjoyed going to the library for the internet. On the other hand there are a couple of coffee shops within a short distance that I could relax in a comfortable chair or couch with some hot tea and be on the internet all day and evening if I chose to. The connection is far better than the library.
The Library catalog is online, so I can request to hold a book to pick up and can easily request ILL if they don't have it at my branch. Libraries still are best about physical books.
I am taking a "wait and see" attitude on a lot of this.
A few years ago if you had asked me whether I buy my music digitally or buy the CD, I would pick the CD, every time. Why? Because it doesn't make sense to me to pay $9.99 for a set of digital bits when for perhaps $14 at Wal-Mart I can get the same content already backed up onto physical media, with some nice color album artwork too. For that matter, stores have sales, so maybe that CD is only $7 and actually CHEAPER than the digital version. Or, I could buy a CD used (sometimes I'll check out the Salvation Army store and pick up some great finds), garage sales, I can lend/borrow CDs, etc. And resell the used CDs when I'm done with them.
All of those reasons are still valid, and I still generally buy CDs (used when possible), but I do also buy digital album downloads purely for the convenience factor, and I find myself doing that more and more often.
I expect the same arguments will apply to e-books. Right now I really don't see a point in paying $13 for a digital book when for $15 I could have it on paper, or borrow it from the library, buy it on sale, from a used bookstore, etc, etc. However, I'm sure eventually I will find myself using them. I remember reading ebooks on my Palm PDA, and I was largely using it for public domain works. The one time I read a modern novel was admittedly a pirated version, but "in my defense" (not that it's really much of one) I did already own the paper copy.
This, too, is why I'm skeptical about the big push toward "e-textbooks" -- I bought all my textbooks in used editions wherever I could, and resold probably 80% of them immediately after the term was over. These e-textbooks would have to be at least half the cost of a traditional book in order to provide value over the net cost of a typical buy/resell scenario.
But the retailer should be allowed to RESELL a product after they've purchased it for whatever price they desire. Even with copyrighted works this is legal because of the First-sale doctrine. Although I guess some eBooks (legally or illegally) have EULAs which could negate this.
Most retailers choose to sell an item for more than they paid for it because it's logical to make a profit, but in most cases it's not illegal to resell at a discount.
That's what the change in Amazon pricing is about. Amazon is not a reseller under the new model - it is an agent of the publisher. The publisher is the seller, and all Amazon is doing is working at the behest of the publisher to facilitate the sale. Hence there is no "resale."
I use mine a lot. I'll often borrow a book I'm thinking of buying, read a few chapters in and, if I like it, I'll buy it.
Furthermore, I'm repeatedly amazed at how busy my local library is. I thought everyone round here went to the mall or watched TV in their spare time
In my mind that model is much more injurious to the free market than Amazon establishing a price ceiling for their books.
It's muddy. Amazon had a monopsony. Now it doesn't. In theory that's better, because Amazon was essentially a resale price setter. In practical terms, if some books (new best sellers) cost more, but everything else costs less than before, it could be a good thing.
I use mine a lot. I'll often borrow a book I'm thinking of buying, read a few chapters in and, if I like it, I'll buy it.
Furthermore, I'm repeatedly amazed at how busy my local library is. I thought everyone round here went to the mall or watched TV in their spare time
Exactly, lots of people use the library. I see folks of all ages in there. The public library is an excellent resource for those willing to use it. Now if you are in a small town in the middle of nowhere, that's an understandable issue, but if you are in a city of any real size, you really have no excuse. I can only laugh when someone says something as dumb as "Who goes to the library?"
Now maybe years down the road from now you will just have a slim flexible reader into which you will login your library card and check out a book on to your e-reader for 2 weeks and then renew through the e-reader automatically if needed without visiting the library if someone hasn't put it on hold (I am assuming there will still be some type of concept of a limited number of copies owned by the library). Certainly would make returning books a snap. Something like that is bound to eventually happen most likely.
I am not shure whether that actual is a sad thing. Overhere in The Netherlands we have a fixed price for several years now. Last week a review on that law was carried out and the outcome was that the fixed price contributed immensly to a diverse and rich offering of books in the Dutch language. In the research a comparison was made to the UK where of the last few years. One of major findings in that area is that the offerings in UK has actually diminissed and the conditions for new authors are very hard as well as that only the major titles are on sale on most locations.
In NL, you indeed see the same pattern, shops only selling the large volume titles, however many specialised stores still exists, even in smaller towns and villages. A thing which is disappearing in the UK (which I observed recently myself as well). It seems that therefore a regulated minimum book price offers a better choice is available to customers, better shops with knowledgable resellers, more flourishing publishers and more opportunities for authors. And let not forget generates more jobs as well.
So overall, I got an impression that a slightly higher price is not always a bad thing overing a better balance between social needs and market optimalisations
This seems a little... socialist for the US of A. [note: I'm not a conservative. I just think this would probably not work so well here.]
Yep that is the way it should be but I doubt the publishers will allow it. The current price of books both hard and soft is crazy and bears no relationship to the cost of publishing them. Now to have to pay $15 and up for a digital copy is just as hard to swallow.
I'll take my library card any day thanks.
Amazon sold ebooks at a fixed price, taking a loss on each book. Why do you suppose they did that? To help out its customers? Don't think so.