I read an article at Publishers Weekly this morning that irritated me, and because I had this blog to write you, RTB readers, will receive the bulk of my rant.
There are primarily two kinds of e-books: e-books that are released exclusively (or first as) e-books; and those which are released in both print and e-book form simultaneously. For the most part, when I’m talking about e-books in this article, I’m referring to the later.
Most major publishers now release e-books along with the print release. All of my books have been released as such. I don’t pay much attention to the e-book market because according to my royalty statements, my e-book sales are small–far less than 1% of my total sales.
But I’m also a realist, and I know that e-book sales will continue to increase over time. While I don’t believe the dire predictions that the print market will disappear (I remember one such article I read in 2005 or 2006 that predicted that e-books would outsell print books in five years) I do think that e-book sales will rise. It’s simply common sense: as more people become accustomed to reading books on an electronic reader, more people will purchase their books as e-books. They’re convenient, especially for travel, and you can store more e-books in most readers than you can in a bookshelf-lined wall. As technology has improved, so has the reading experience–my agent loves her Kindle. I know many people who have gone to reading almost exclusively on the Kindle.
This isn’t a bad thing or a good thing, it just is. Authors still get paid royalties on e-books, publishers still get paid for producing them, and readers still get to enjoy their favorite books in whichever format they prefer.
But as more readers become e-readers, I fear that book sales will take a substantial hit–akin to the near-destruction of the music industry.
Does anyone remember Napster? The site people going go and steal music? And yes, it’s stealing. No one involved in the production of that music, from the producer to the distributor to the musician, was paid for that song. Napster spread like wildfire, with everyone–mostly young people but also adults who should know better–sitting at their computer and downloading song after song after song for their personal enjoyment.
Napster is gone, but the affects are still being felt. Digital music was demanded by the public–but the music industry didn’t react fast enough. As such, a generation of listeners has the opinion that downloading music illegally isn’t wrong.
I wanted to highlight some comments from people who didn’t have a problem with it, and was unfortunately not surprised by (taken from the article linked above):
“I think illegal downloading is just unfortunately the way forward for most music listeners now. But to be honest, if you look at poor quality of album art now, there’s not much going for the physical format.If I do download it’s generally only with the massive bands who won’t miss my £9.97″
“I do download a lot of music illegally, I admit that. It may be a lame excuse, but it’s simply cause I cannot afford to buy all the music I like.”
“I’ll be honest, i don’t buy that much music, but i download plenty illegally. it’s not that i think music is worthless, it’s just that while i’m on minimum wage, i can’t afford to line the pockets of EMI and Bono and the like”
“There is soo much music available nowadays, its impossible for big music fans to hear all the new bands if they have to buy the CDs.”
“i download quite a bit of music, but also, i’ll buy the album is i feel it has been put a lot of effort in it, i reckon by downloading illegally gives me a chance to test out the album before making the purchase, which is good coz i simply cannot afford to buy too the music i like legally…..”
“most artists make their money from touring and merch anyway! ”
“i think that the record companies have brought this on themselves by having cd’s at ridiculus prices.”
Of course, there are some voices of reason, but by and large people don’t consider illegal downloading music to be wrong because 1) music companies won’t miss it; 2) they’ll buy it if they like it; 3) there’s so much out there, they wouldn’t be able to buy everything they want to listen to.
Ironically, these people are damaging those they don’t intend to. They want to stick it to the music execs? Sure, stealing music will hurt them–but it’ll hurt the artists more. The musicians who won’t be making any royalties on the albums that are stolen. They put in years of hard work and labor into their music–music that someone thought was worth producing–but they’re not going to be paid for it.
I believe it’s true that the millions of illegally downloaded tracks every week does not equal millions of lost sales–if it’s free, you tend to over-indulge and take things you wouldn’t have taken in the first place. (I doubt there’s anyone, when going to an “all you can eat” restaurant, who doesn’t overeat.) But they do equal lost sales–hitting the music companies AND, more costly, the musicians.
Think of your favorite artist. Song. Band. What if they never wrote another song? Never sang in public again?
Some artists share their work freely–one of the most incredible singers I’ve heard used to sing at one of the masses at my church. Some give free concerts. Some voluntarily offer their music for free. That is their right and their choice.
But many do not. Or they’ll offer one free song and hope it’ll be popular and stimulate sales of their album. (Kid Rock offered a free download of his song Warrior, which he created as the theme song for the National Guard. My daughter found it when a friend emailed her the link, and she downloaded it to her iTunes–then went out and bought his CD.) You can go to his website and listen to all his music if you so choose.
I honestly don’t care if the price of music is too high or if someone wants to “try it out” before they buy it. They can 1) listen at the library; 2) listen to a friend’s CD; 3) listen on the radio.
Stealing is wrong. Period.
Unfortunately, what happened to musicians could happen, to a lessor degree, to authors.
First, I don’t think there is a direct parallel because they are two different entertainment mediums. More young people listen to music and more older people read. But honestly, as the younger generation who doesn’t think that stealing music is wrong, they may grown up and translate that to books.
Stealing books online is a crime, as if you walked into Barnes & Noble, grabbed a book off the rack, and left without paying.
Illegal downloads of books–whether as e-books or scanned copies of print books–is increasing. While at this point authors are “only” losing out on a few hundred sales per title, if you’re an exclusive e-book author–such as many with Ellora’s Cave–those sales are a much bigger hit to your bottom line.
There are a lot of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) sites that make it easy to steal the creative work of others. One site that has been discussed on author looks is Scribd. Publishers Weekly wrong an article regarding the illegal downloads and, to give Scribd credit, they appear to be very prompt in removing copyright-protected material. Five of my books are illegally posted. They’ve only been downloaded a handful of times. I’ve already been through this with Scribd before (through my publisher) and they removed other books of mine that had been up there. Here we go again . . .
But none of this stops others from illegally distributing books created by others. It’s the exact same thing as copying the book at Kinko’s and handing it out. The argument that the thieves aren’t making any money on it doesn’t hold water: they are stealing intellectual property.
The cost of books doesn’t hold water, either. There are libraries. Borrow for free. There are Used Book Stores (UBS) — try new authors on the cheap. (ASIDE: I don’t have a problem with UBS. Someone bought the book–I was paid for it. Libraries buy books and they are borrowed by many, many people–far more than get “resold.” Borrow from a friend.)
Right now, this isn’t a crisis because the thefts are minimal. But I’ll bet the music industry didn’t see the crisis when Napster posted their first illegal track.
And, frankly, there’s not a lot we can do about it. People will illegal post books in countries that don’t honor copyright protection. People will seek out illegal downloads. But we can educate readers. There are cheap solutions for reading other than theft. We can teach our children about copyright law. We can live what we preach and not download bootlegged copies of software on our computer, and buy our digital music rather than steal it.
It starts with us in all aspects of our lives. We can’t allow the publishing industry to be blindsided like the music industry.
No related posts.
Allison and Jess,
In my post I do mention that the difference between the two is that when you pass along a used book, you no longer own a copy yourself.
That still doesn’t mean that the owner of the book owns the intellectual property contained inside of it. So I would argue that giving away or selling a used book is the “moral equivalent” to giving away or selling an ebook. The fact that one isn’t as easily copyable doesn’t, to my mind, make much difference.
That said, believe me, I’ve bought and read many used books in my time. Sharing books is a traditional part of the reading experience. Something we’ve done for centuries. Something that is considered normal and legal.
All we’re dealing with here is a new form of sharing. Unfortunately, that sharing can be done on a massive scale and it scares us.
Ebooks are a new technology. And like any new technology there will be an adjustment period before we fully understand its impact.
But, again, I tend to believe that, in the long run, ebooks and Kindle devices can only be good for authors — if only because it means that people who don’t normally read might actually start doing it. If they have a fancy little gadget that allows them to download a book, then those who never stepped foot in an actual bookstore or library might decide to take a chance.
I discovered books through a magazine. I was not really a reader when, at the age of twelve, I read the first part of a serialized novel by Donald Westlake in a magazine. That moment changed my life. Not only turned me into a reader, but gave me the desire to want to write, as well.
So anything — ANYTHING — that gets our work out there can only be good for us.
But honestly, as the younger generation who doesn’t think that stealing music is wrong, they may grown up and translate that to books.”
I disagree completely in that assumption, not just because you think it’s the younger generation causing the piracy, but also that stealing a movie or music will extend to books.
I think it’s equal oppurtunity pirating, because after all someone had to come up with the programs to allow them to not only steal, but use the pirated technology which doesn’t exclude the “older generation”.
The music industry has it’s hands full right now, trying to jump out of their backwards marketing and actually join technology. Apple got into the market at the right time, and they seem to know what they’re doing with the music, movies, rentals, ebooks, and audiobooks. They’re offering downloads for decent pricing that is compatible with the Ipod or Iphone. That’s definitely more than the publishers are doing and squabbling over the Kindle’s voice feature which allows the blind the option of listening to the book voice actor free. Its a computer doing the voice. But now they are cracking down on cutting edge technology that would simply allow a small fraction of the world to listen to a book without having to buy the audiobook. But they bought the kindle book on amazon…they paid their money for the book and are going to be prevented from listening to it if the publishers have their way. Simply because it was an unplanned idea that they refused to accept.
The publishers look just about as bad in this story as the music industry did a few years ago. When the music industry began the lawsuits against little old grandmothers (whose grandchildren used her computer to get pirated music), and dead corpses, they made the transition to cold unfeeling corporate America afraid to lose potential profits. If the publishers had marketing and ads saying something like, “By pirating ebooks, you are stealing $ from Mary Sue’s royalties, and she’s having a hard time feeding her family” it’d be a different story. Because I now that a lot of people don’t realize what selling a book does for the author. Yes, it can potentially get their name on the NYT bestseller list, but it also provides them with a small royalty per book which pays the author’s bills.
Now, IMO piracy is illegal and should be prosecuted. But to my friends, they view piracy like they are cutting out the middlemen. The movie theaters, the record/cd stores, grocery/gm giants, and publishers. What they don’t necessarily realize or care about is that those people have to pay the bills too.
And like some other comments, here, what exactly are we as consumers supposed to do? We can do what the authors do, and report the pirated copies to the publisher’s, but that won’t stop new software from finding a loophole.
So, what exactly are the people innocent of pirating, supposed to do in this situation?
This is such a great topic, and the music industry isn’t the only one that suffers from illegal downloading. Software programs are VERY often downloaded illegally, and people justify it with the same reasoning — “It’s too expensive to buy the one I want and I can just get it for free.”
I know people who ONLY download their software. In fact, someone recently asked if I wanted something they had and seemed to be completely confused when I said no. If I needed it, I would buy it. They just didn’t get why I would “waste” the money if I didn’t have to.
I think a lot of people feel ENTITLED to these downloads, simply because someone made them available. Sadly, that seems to be more prevalent these days and is it not just limited to the younger generations.