Cutting their own throats(antipope.org)
antipope.org
Cutting their own throats
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2011/11/cutting-their-own-throats.html
13 comments
Ah, this is the key misconception. If you think Charlie is the only thing going into his books that provides you value, think again. Good development editing, copyediting, fact-checking, typography, and illustrations all go into an excellent book. Amazon has no skill at any of these things.
The future of publishing will belong not to middlemen like Amazon, but to people who can reliably put out high-quality, profitable books even from middling writers, and who can turn a profit based on the carrot of quality rather than the stick of DRM. That means cutting out a lot of the people in traditional publishing, but it doesn't mean that publishing as an industry will go away.
O'Reilly, Five Simple Steps, A Book Apart and other technical publishers are paving the way here, and it won't be long before someone starts an ebook-specific publishing house for trashy romance or adventure novels and makes a killing.
The future of publishing will belong not to middlemen like Amazon, but to people who can reliably put out high-quality, profitable books even from middling writers, and who can turn a profit based on the carrot of quality rather than the stick of DRM. That means cutting out a lot of the people in traditional publishing, but it doesn't mean that publishing as an industry will go away.
O'Reilly, Five Simple Steps, A Book Apart and other technical publishers are paving the way here, and it won't be long before someone starts an ebook-specific publishing house for trashy romance or adventure novels and makes a killing.
Ah, this is the key misconception
I'm aware of that argument, I just don't find it credible. The prevailing arrangement is that the publisher pays people to edit and do cover art, just like they pay people to actually print the physical copies. It does not matter to me whose name is on the check that goes to the person who edits Charlie's book -- Charlie, Amazon, the publisher, whatever. The internals of supplier's accounting systems do not surface value to me.
I'm aware of that argument, I just don't find it credible. The prevailing arrangement is that the publisher pays people to edit and do cover art, just like they pay people to actually print the physical copies. It does not matter to me whose name is on the check that goes to the person who edits Charlie's book -- Charlie, Amazon, the publisher, whatever. The internals of supplier's accounting systems do not surface value to me.
Right, but if Charlie pays, does he know good editors? He might not have the time to research and network (and, in fact, it might be a bad idea to let him choose his own editor). If Amazon pays then they are, for all intents and purposes, playing the exact same role as publisher.
Just because something is possible without a middleman doesn't mean that it is desirable.
Just because something is possible without a middleman doesn't mean that it is desirable.
Really? That's what we're down to? Save the publishers because they're the only ones who can find good editors? That's another arrangement that sucks for everyone --- the readers, the writers, and the editors --- except for the publishers.
This strikes me as the same as saying "save the newspapers, they're the only ones who can run classified ads!". Except, the newspapers do other stuff. What else do the publishers do?
The arrangement we have today made a lot more sense when books lived or died on the retail channel, to which access was a scarcity acquired and allocated ("curated", to use their words) by the publishers. But that world is gone. My grandkids will look at bookstores like soda shops: historical curiosities. There's value in curation, too, but when it isn't backed by the scarcity of access to bookstore shelves, it's not enough value to justify the middleman role.
This strikes me as the same as saying "save the newspapers, they're the only ones who can run classified ads!". Except, the newspapers do other stuff. What else do the publishers do?
The arrangement we have today made a lot more sense when books lived or died on the retail channel, to which access was a scarcity acquired and allocated ("curated", to use their words) by the publishers. But that world is gone. My grandkids will look at bookstores like soda shops: historical curiosities. There's value in curation, too, but when it isn't backed by the scarcity of access to bookstore shelves, it's not enough value to justify the middleman role.
I think he was making a good point: That there is a role for a middleman to add value by providing services (or access to services) that an author may not already have on his own.
That we refer to this middleman as a 'publisher' (which already has meaning in the soon-to-be-outdated book publishing model) is, I think, what you take exception to.
That we refer to this middleman as a 'publisher' (which already has meaning in the soon-to-be-outdated book publishing model) is, I think, what you take exception to.
And if these middle do actually provide value, they will continue to be included in the process. If these organizations (currently known as publishers) are capable of providing capable editors and providing other value to the finished work, I'm sure they'll be able to charge a fee and stay in business.
Job boards have not replaced the headhunter. If anything, people complain about the job boards being a miasma of trash resume. Likewise, those authors who seek such expert consulting might end up positively differentiating themselves.
In the long run though, the business has been disrupted and it is up to the publishers to positions themselves in a way that their expertise and value is appreciated and accessible to authors who might not want to go through them in the traditional means. So perhaps they would do well to charge for the services which still add value (like editorial work or cover art services).
Job boards have not replaced the headhunter. If anything, people complain about the job boards being a miasma of trash resume. Likewise, those authors who seek such expert consulting might end up positively differentiating themselves.
In the long run though, the business has been disrupted and it is up to the publishers to positions themselves in a way that their expertise and value is appreciated and accessible to authors who might not want to go through them in the traditional means. So perhaps they would do well to charge for the services which still add value (like editorial work or cover art services).
Judging by the deplorable quality of the editing and cover illustrations on many Kindle books, I question whether the traditional publishers are adding anything of value. Oftentimes it's obvious that the cover illustration was tossed together in Photoshop or Illustrator in an afternoon, and the editing wouldn't pass muster in a freshman composition class. Sometimes it doesn't look like they've even bothered to run the spell-checker.
B&W E-Ink graphics? That may be responsible for the cheesy look in large part.
This doesn't excuse the editing, but I've heard that one problem is that publishers often don't have electronic rights to use the cover illustrations they use on physical books.
Why would editing, cover art, etc. be something that can be best done by a middleman though?
It seems more logical to me to see this as a service provided by separate agencies, paid for by either the author or the publisher. Such agencies could be of various sizes and compete on price or a reputation for quality work.
It seems more logical to me to see this as a service provided by separate agencies, paid for by either the author or the publisher. Such agencies could be of various sizes and compete on price or a reputation for quality work.
* Such agencies could be of various sizes and compete on price or a reputation for quality work.*
Right, but would an author want to deal with comparing all the agencies and selecting the best one? Is he/she necessarily qualified to do so? Like I said, having a middleman in there is of use at times.
Right, but would an author want to deal with comparing all the agencies and selecting the best one? Is he/she necessarily qualified to do so? Like I said, having a middleman in there is of use at times.
So people will set up companies that work for the authors to set this stuff up, and those companies won't be able to capture most of the proceeds from the authors work, but instead will be forced to price according to the value their work provides to the authors.
Does an author want to deal with comparing all the publishers and selecting the best one? Is he/she necessarily qualified to do so?
Whatever the answer is, it applies just as well to my scenario.
Whatever the answer is, it applies just as well to my scenario.
It is against your interest for Amazon to have a monopoly, and DRM is helping give them a monopoly. That's the thrust of the argument.
I really wanted to buy an ebook reader when I last visited the States. As soon as I realized that if I buy anything that isn't a Kindle means I can't access all the books I've already bought from Amazon, I knew I'd have to buy a Kindle. This is a bad situation for a consumer, since I'm locked in to a specific platform. Right now it's fine for me, since the Kindle also happens to be the cheapest offering. But fast-forward 5 years, and if there's no longer competition, Amazon no longer has to make the price affordable for me.
I really wanted to buy an ebook reader when I last visited the States. As soon as I realized that if I buy anything that isn't a Kindle means I can't access all the books I've already bought from Amazon, I knew I'd have to buy a Kindle. This is a bad situation for a consumer, since I'm locked in to a specific platform. Right now it's fine for me, since the Kindle also happens to be the cheapest offering. But fast-forward 5 years, and if there's no longer competition, Amazon no longer has to make the price affordable for me.
What other systems can you play your xbox games on?
XBox is a platform, with many, many IP points.
Kindle is a cheesy pad for displaying text. It has 80-hour battery lifetime and .... nothing else.
It would be trivial to display ALL Kindle content on nearly any device. The lock is economic and nothing else.
Kindle is a cheesy pad for displaying text. It has 80-hour battery lifetime and .... nothing else.
It would be trivial to display ALL Kindle content on nearly any device. The lock is economic and nothing else.
The problem for you as a reader: a monopoly would allow Amazon to jack up retail prices as high as it feels like.
Amazon could also eg set very unfavourable terms for authors, so only mainstream literature becomes commercially viable.
Of course, other channels would open up in this event, but there would be a massive time lag. And if Amazon didn't squeeze too hard, they could maintain the status quo for a long time.
Monopolies are bad for everyone.
Amazon could also eg set very unfavourable terms for authors, so only mainstream literature becomes commercially viable.
Of course, other channels would open up in this event, but there would be a massive time lag. And if Amazon didn't squeeze too hard, they could maintain the status quo for a long time.
Monopolies are bad for everyone.
> Amazon could also eg set very unfavourable terms for authors, so only mainstream literature becomes commercially viable.
Even as a monopoly, why would Amazon do that? The cost of distributing another ebook is negligible (and may even effectively be negative if the competitive advantages of a larger catalog outweigh the server, bandwidth and other operating costs).
It seems to me that, even as a monopoly, Amazon doesn't really care whether the books they sell are mainstream or non-mainstream as long as they make as much money as they can from them. And that doesn't mean jacking up the retail price just for the hell of it (or squeezing authors for fun). That means trying to gather enough data to estimate the supply and demand curves and pricing based on that (something Amazon is already good at).
I think authors are likely to get squeezed regardless because, like musicians, there are too many that are willing to write for (effectively) free just to get the lottery ticket for the big leagues. On the consumer side, it is important to remember that every book is already a tiny little monopoly of its own, so it isn't clear which way things will go if they are aggregated.
Even as a monopoly, why would Amazon do that? The cost of distributing another ebook is negligible (and may even effectively be negative if the competitive advantages of a larger catalog outweigh the server, bandwidth and other operating costs).
It seems to me that, even as a monopoly, Amazon doesn't really care whether the books they sell are mainstream or non-mainstream as long as they make as much money as they can from them. And that doesn't mean jacking up the retail price just for the hell of it (or squeezing authors for fun). That means trying to gather enough data to estimate the supply and demand curves and pricing based on that (something Amazon is already good at).
I think authors are likely to get squeezed regardless because, like musicians, there are too many that are willing to write for (effectively) free just to get the lottery ticket for the big leagues. On the consumer side, it is important to remember that every book is already a tiny little monopoly of its own, so it isn't clear which way things will go if they are aggregated.
only mainstream literature becomes commercially viable.
Only mainstream literature is commercially viable in the status quo.
Only mainstream literature is commercially viable in the status quo.
Stross seems to make it work. In what world is he mainstream? I'm presuming you know that Stross was the one who wrote the blog post above.
One of my brother's Creative Writing lecturers was fond of the following fact
There are more professional concert pianists in the UK than full-time authors of fiction.
There are more professional concert pianists in the UK than full-time authors of fiction.
nikatwork's definition of 'mainstream literature' obviously is different from your definition of 'mainstream literature'. Using his definition, your assertion is false.
I'd imagine Amazon fears becoming a monopoly. US/EU antitrust would break them up pronto.
> I'd imagine Amazon fears becoming a monopoly. US/EU antitrust would break them up pronto.
Name three monopolies that were broken up while it made a difference. In which of those cases did consumer prices go down as a result of the breakup?
The only "broken up while it made a difference" case that I'm aware of is Standard Oil. However, the result was higher prices, not lower. (Standard absolutely hammered transportation companies and passed on the savings to consumers. After the breakup, transportation companies could turn down biz from one oil company to get biz from another and thus were able to raise their prices. That's why railroads pushed for the breakup.)
Name three monopolies that were broken up while it made a difference. In which of those cases did consumer prices go down as a result of the breakup?
The only "broken up while it made a difference" case that I'm aware of is Standard Oil. However, the result was higher prices, not lower. (Standard absolutely hammered transportation companies and passed on the savings to consumers. After the breakup, transportation companies could turn down biz from one oil company to get biz from another and thus were able to raise their prices. That's why railroads pushed for the breakup.)
Ok, off topic, but AT&T breakup was good. Didn't actually lower prices, but services sprouted like weeds. For 100 years, a simple desktop landline (2 different models! Black or green!) turned into the explosion of products and services we have today.
The AT&T breakup happened after sprint et al started offering long distance services.
The carterfone decision, which happened before that, is what gave us phone choice.
There was some post-breakup price-reduction in local services, but they all came from the local monopolies that were the result of the AT&T breakup. The services themselves, with the exception of caller-id, were offered by pre-breakup AT&T but were more expensive. Since the land-line service price decline happened when cell-phone carriers started offering those same services for less, I think that cell-phone competition gets the credit, not the breakup.
And beige was available before green. (I think that white was as well.)
The carterfone decision, which happened before that, is what gave us phone choice.
There was some post-breakup price-reduction in local services, but they all came from the local monopolies that were the result of the AT&T breakup. The services themselves, with the exception of caller-id, were offered by pre-breakup AT&T but were more expensive. Since the land-line service price decline happened when cell-phone carriers started offering those same services for less, I think that cell-phone competition gets the credit, not the breakup.
And beige was available before green. (I think that white was as well.)
Hm. I'd think cell-phones themselves came to life post-ATT monopoly. That whole industry was part of the windfall.
> I'd think cell-phones themselves came to life post-ATT monopoly.
I thought that I said that.
> That whole industry was part of the windfall.
How so? Are you claiming that AT&T would have been granted a cell-phone monopoly if it hadn't been broken up? If so, why weren't the baby bells, which still had a land-line monopoly, given a cell phone monopoly?
I think that the success of sprint et al wrt long distance by the time that cell-phones were taking off pretty much guaranteed that there AT&T wouldn't be granted a cell phone monoply even if the break-up hadn't occurred.
I thought that I said that.
> That whole industry was part of the windfall.
How so? Are you claiming that AT&T would have been granted a cell-phone monopoly if it hadn't been broken up? If so, why weren't the baby bells, which still had a land-line monopoly, given a cell phone monopoly?
I think that the success of sprint et al wrt long distance by the time that cell-phones were taking off pretty much guaranteed that there AT&T wouldn't be granted a cell phone monoply even if the break-up hadn't occurred.
I think Charlie's worrying about Amazon putting him out of business, meaning he won't be able to afford to write books any more and will have to find alternative employment. If you like Charlie's books - like I do! - that's definitely against your interests
I definitely think there's a potential issue with buying into an e-book platform where there's a high barrier to switch.
About two years ago, my girlfriend decided she wanted an e-book reader. At the time, you could only get a Kindle online, and she didn't want to buy one without seeing the device first; so we bought a Nook reader (after she played with it in the store).
Over the next year, we probably bought about $2000 of books on it, when she finally got tired of being envious of my Kindle (which I had recently purchased) and I gave it to her.
She ended up spending like three weeks cracking the DRM on all the Barnes and Noble e-pub books she had purchased, so that she'd be able to read them on the Kindle.
Most people wouldn't have done that, I suspect. They'd have just stuck with whatever platform they initially decided on (and had amassed a collection of DRM-laden files with).
About two years ago, my girlfriend decided she wanted an e-book reader. At the time, you could only get a Kindle online, and she didn't want to buy one without seeing the device first; so we bought a Nook reader (after she played with it in the store).
Over the next year, we probably bought about $2000 of books on it, when she finally got tired of being envious of my Kindle (which I had recently purchased) and I gave it to her.
She ended up spending like three weeks cracking the DRM on all the Barnes and Noble e-pub books she had purchased, so that she'd be able to read them on the Kindle.
Most people wouldn't have done that, I suspect. They'd have just stuck with whatever platform they initially decided on (and had amassed a collection of DRM-laden files with).
My girlfriend got on to the ebook train early, before the Kindle was available in our region, paying ~$500 for a Cybook that reads Mobipocket format files.
A few years later, after amassing a couple of grand worth of DRMed books, the reader failed - and this presented two problems.
The first was that a replacement e-ink ebook reader that would read DRMd Mobipocket files was now impossible to come across, EPUB having mostly won out in the non-Kindle market. The second was that all those DRMd books she "owned" were locked to a broken device ID.
The only solution was the same as in the parent comment - spend a decent chunk of time breaking the DRM and changing their format.
A few years later, after amassing a couple of grand worth of DRMed books, the reader failed - and this presented two problems.
The first was that a replacement e-ink ebook reader that would read DRMd Mobipocket files was now impossible to come across, EPUB having mostly won out in the non-Kindle market. The second was that all those DRMd books she "owned" were locked to a broken device ID.
The only solution was the same as in the parent comment - spend a decent chunk of time breaking the DRM and changing their format.
Ironically, this is an advantage of Kindle. The last time I checked, Kindle DRM was relatively easy to get rid of. I didn't research as exhaustively because I wasn't very interested, but it seemed like non-Kindle formats were harder to deal with.
The Kindle format actually is Mobipocket underneath, but with an algorithm layered on top that converts a Kindle serial number into a Mobipocket ID. Needless to say that algorithm has been leaked.
The DRM in EPUB is quite easy to get rid of too.
The DRM in EPUB is quite easy to get rid of too.
Is there a DRM scheme that's not easy to get rid of?
The problem for me, is that so long as there is DRM attached, I don't feel like I've purchased something I own. Therefore, that erodes significantly the price I am willing to pay for Kindle ebooks; I enjoy reading on the Kindle more, so I like having the ebook, but I don't want to spend money to be locked-in. My threshold right now for an ebook is at least a 40% discount relative to the price I could purchase the physical book, to offset the DRM risk.
Ideally, what I would like would be to be able to buy a paper book, and get the ebook bundled for $X more (say, $2-$5 more). I would have the satisfaction of a book on the shelf, actually owning the book, and then the convenience of an ebook. I would also be less bothered by the presence of DRM. If I could buy DRM-free ebooks from Amazon, I would be willing to pay closer to price parity of the corresponding paper book.
Ideally, what I would like would be to be able to buy a paper book, and get the ebook bundled for $X more (say, $2-$5 more). I would have the satisfaction of a book on the shelf, actually owning the book, and then the convenience of an ebook. I would also be less bothered by the presence of DRM. If I could buy DRM-free ebooks from Amazon, I would be willing to pay closer to price parity of the corresponding paper book.
This made me think that we can expect to see ebook wars like we are currently witnessing with other media, e.g. iTunes, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu. If, say, three of the big six publishers end up creating their own marketplaces with their own formats and DRM, and possibly even their own devices, while pulling their ebook titles from Amazon and B&N, I can't help but think it will be a net loss for customers and of dubious advantage to the publishers. I wonder if Amazon's dominance would make this too little, too late. Something tells me there's still room to maneuver, but perhaps not for long.
As I've said in other contexts, I simply will not purchase a subscription to each of ABC, NBC, CBS, Discovery, HBO, Showtime, etc etc and those guys can just forget that dream.
Books are a bit different than those media wars, though, because they are something one buys in discrete units. If I can pop the name of the book or author into Google and land on one or another reasonably well-done website by the publisher, and they come to some sort of agreement on DRM in the manner of something like Bluray (which is to say, it is not mandatory that every company uses its own DRM and there is prior art for industry-wide agreements), it matters much less to me that I buy one book from X and another from Y. It isn't harmless, but it isn't the fatal objection I think it is for any industry with 15 different entities all trying to work out how to carve a $9.95/month subscription fee each out of me.
Where I feel like video needs something like Netflix or Amazon to serve as a subscription aggregator and to manage cash flow conversion from subscriptions to per-watch fees transparently, it seems like publisher websites and Google (as a search engine, not some new service) might be sufficient for ebooks.
If the book publishers get their act together.
...
So never mind, I guess.
Books are a bit different than those media wars, though, because they are something one buys in discrete units. If I can pop the name of the book or author into Google and land on one or another reasonably well-done website by the publisher, and they come to some sort of agreement on DRM in the manner of something like Bluray (which is to say, it is not mandatory that every company uses its own DRM and there is prior art for industry-wide agreements), it matters much less to me that I buy one book from X and another from Y. It isn't harmless, but it isn't the fatal objection I think it is for any industry with 15 different entities all trying to work out how to carve a $9.95/month subscription fee each out of me.
Where I feel like video needs something like Netflix or Amazon to serve as a subscription aggregator and to manage cash flow conversion from subscriptions to per-watch fees transparently, it seems like publisher websites and Google (as a search engine, not some new service) might be sufficient for ebooks.
If the book publishers get their act together.
...
So never mind, I guess.
There are a lot of books that are only available through piracy. You can download 1 GB torrents containing more books than anyone will ever read in a year, and yet there are still major books like Dune that aren't available to Kindle users. The selection for older, out-of-print titles is even worse.
Isn't this Dune for Kindle? http://www.amazon.com/Dune-Sf-Masterworks-ebook/dp/B004KA9UX...
I think the author is pointing out that the Kindle version of Dune is terrible. Horrible typos, bad formatting, etc.
Unfortunately, many middle-aged books have this problem, and unless you can wade through the Amazon reviews (which are not format-specific) and find out, you don't know whether the publisher just copy/pasted a text file and hit PublishNow! or actually had an editor sit down with it, mark chapters, fix typos introduced, un-break words if it was scanned, etc.
Unfortunately, many middle-aged books have this problem, and unless you can wade through the Amazon reviews (which are not format-specific) and find out, you don't know whether the publisher just copy/pasted a text file and hit PublishNow! or actually had an editor sit down with it, mark chapters, fix typos introduced, un-break words if it was scanned, etc.
Just to chime in with a little more strength than an invisible upvote, this is one of those things that doesn't sound to annoying until you're experiencing it yourself.
I used to read reviews complaining about it and think "stop whining" to myself, but now that I'm ready books that I paid for and which clearly went straight through OCR software with no human supervision... Really, really frustrating.
I used to read reviews complaining about it and think "stop whining" to myself, but now that I'm ready books that I paid for and which clearly went straight through OCR software with no human supervision... Really, really frustrating.
1 agrec its very distracting and ma|<es it hard to fol1ow thc words.
These are examples of OCR errors I've seen on ebooks I've paid for
These are examples of OCR errors I've seen on ebooks I've paid for
So more argument against publishers adding value.
Graduate level math and science textbooks, too.
Amazon's ability to forgo short-term profits and look towards the long term is their biggest weapon. Very few companies are able to act on threats far enough into the future to fight against Amazon's strategies at a time when defeating those strategies still possible.
I love my kindle, but I've been reluctant to buy books for it. I don't want to support a medium that causes the average reads per copy to tend to be 1. After reading this I'm conflicted: will buying more DRM books cause paper publishers to see the light sooner?
Does that mean you're pirating books for it rather than buying them?
I buy lots of books on the kindle. However, I wanted to read "Atlas Shrugged" and there was no kindle book for sale so I found it online.
I take the customer is always right approach. I am the customer. I consume content in the way I find most convenient. If you make it difficult for me to pay you to do what's most convenient for me, I don't.
I buy lots of books on the kindle. However, I wanted to read "Atlas Shrugged" and there was no kindle book for sale so I found it online.
I take the customer is always right approach. I am the customer. I consume content in the way I find most convenient. If you make it difficult for me to pay you to do what's most convenient for me, I don't.
No, just good old-fashioned hardcopies. From amazon, secondhand stores, libraries. Wherever they begin, they end up back at the library. But I can't do that with ebooks.
I can't believe it's not yet obvious to some people that DRM isn't an anti-piracy measure, it's a vendor lock-in measure. How many times is this fact going to have to be demonstrated until people take notice?
I have no idea where he gets his data on price. I am tempted to say that he made it up, but I have no evidence for that.
But the last two books I looked up were more expensive as a kindle edition than as a physically printed book. Not the same price -- that would have been bad enough -- but not having it printed was more expensive.
Since I am not interested in more dead wood I didn't buy either.
But the last two books I looked up were more expensive as a kindle edition than as a physically printed book. Not the same price -- that would have been bad enough -- but not having it printed was more expensive.
Since I am not interested in more dead wood I didn't buy either.
I really don't think history bears this out. The lesson of Apple seems to be people will accept DRM if you make it easy for them to buy. There were plenty of places to buy DRM-free music (including Amazon) yet people still went to iTunes because of its ease of use.
Of course Apple later proved DRM doesn't matter and people will pay for a DRM-free product if it's easy to purchase. But that's an entirely different point. As far as I can see the historical precedent is that DRM isn't enough of a deterrent for most people.
Of course Apple later proved DRM doesn't matter and people will pay for a DRM-free product if it's easy to purchase. But that's an entirely different point. As far as I can see the historical precedent is that DRM isn't enough of a deterrent for most people.
The author's point was not that DRM deters people from buying; rather, that it deters them from using multiple competing services.
I think iTunes actually supports the author's point - how many people were there using iTunes and Rhapsody? DRM seems to have kept the iTunes customer well and truly locked in, at least for long enough for Apple to make a pile of money off their monopoly before Spotify et al. started moving in.
I think iTunes actually supports the author's point - how many people were there using iTunes and Rhapsody? DRM seems to have kept the iTunes customer well and truly locked in, at least for long enough for Apple to make a pile of money off their monopoly before Spotify et al. started moving in.
I understand that but I think the inferred point was "drop DRM and people will buy from multiple sources" which I don't think is true. My point is people don't want to use multiple services. If Amazon makes it easy to purchase books people will stay with Amazon regardless of DRM.
I'll give you an example. I was tempted to buy books from Apress today (they have a all e-books are $15 special). But I weighed the pros and cons and decided to buy them from Amazon instead for an average of $7 more per book because I like having books in my Kindle library that are automatically accessible.
So DRM is irrelevant but it isn't the main deterrent.
I'll give you an example. I was tempted to buy books from Apress today (they have a all e-books are $15 special). But I weighed the pros and cons and decided to buy them from Amazon instead for an average of $7 more per book because I like having books in my Kindle library that are automatically accessible.
So DRM is irrelevant but it isn't the main deterrent.
I have a kindle, and I very much like the convenience of being able to manage my library by easily moving books on and off of the kindle wherever I am. However, any time I buy a book from Amazon I first check if a DRM-free alternative is available elsewhere. I don't do this because of principled opposition to DRM (I am opposed to DRM on principle, but it's not why I do this); I do it because I want my books to be as portable as possible, not locked in to any one merchant, platform, or device. Unfortunately, in most cases the only option is a file with some other form of DRM that won't work on my kindle. If the big publishers stopped using DRM, I would stop buying ebooks from Amazon and buy all of them directly from the publishers.
If such were to happen, I'm sure that other people would offer cloud services that would allow you to upload your eBooks from wherever you buy them and then access them from your device over your choice of wireless carrier. If they lost enough market share, I'm sure that even Amazon would start offering such a service.
If such were to happen, I'm sure that other people would offer cloud services that would allow you to upload your eBooks from wherever you buy them and then access them from your device over your choice of wireless carrier. If they lost enough market share, I'm sure that even Amazon would start offering such a service.
I think Barnes and Noble has the potential to mount a decent challenge with the Nook - I've been seeing more and more of them around. I can see the ease or difficulty of moving books between the two affecting its performance.
If it's easy to buy from B&N and put it on the Kindle, and buy from Amazon and put it on the Nook, I can see people purchasing from both stores.
If it's easy to buy from B&N and put it on the Kindle, and buy from Amazon and put it on the Nook, I can see people purchasing from both stores.
> My point is people don't want to use multiple services.
And the OP's point hinges on the idea that while a given person will want to use only one service, there's less likely to be a single service that everybody uses, with each consumer buying from the service of their choice, knowing that their book can be read on any device.
And the OP's point hinges on the idea that while a given person will want to use only one service, there's less likely to be a single service that everybody uses, with each consumer buying from the service of their choice, knowing that their book can be read on any device.
I thought the success of iTunes was only because of the success of the iPod. The iPod was one of the most popular music playing devices. I'd say that iTunes Music Store only did well because of the popularity of the iPod and how it was built into the software you use to manage your iPod.
I can read my Kindle books in nearly every device I own.
This is othogonal to Charlie's point; the pertitent question is "how many ebooks do you buy from places other than Amazon?".
Right on - I usually use my Kindle, but also use the Kindle Reader app on my MacBook and on my Droid.
BTW, I have bought a lot of Charlie's books, all in Kindle format.
I really like publishers like O'Reilly and Manning that provide both MOBI and ePUB formats when you buy - that is real respect for customers.
BTW, I have bought a lot of Charlie's books, all in Kindle format.
I really like publishers like O'Reilly and Manning that provide both MOBI and ePUB formats when you buy - that is real respect for customers.
The telling statistic for someone such as yourself, would be how much do you use non-kindle reader software. If you are using the kindle app on your phone, tablet or laptop the author's point is still valid. You are (willingly!) locked in to Amazon's kindle ecosystem; even if you aren't using the device itself.
[deleted]
How many places sell ebooks you can read on your Kindle, though?
If you're going offer an introduction to the concept of the Big Six, why tease with half of them and omit the other three by 'etc.'?
A rundown of the Big Six and their and their more prominent imprints: http://www.scottmarlowe.com/post/Publishinge28099s-Big-6-Who...
A rundown of the Big Six and their and their more prominent imprints: http://www.scottmarlowe.com/post/Publishinge28099s-Big-6-Who...
The biggest problem with DRM is that it often punishes legit customers. I always thought DRM was no big deal until I signed up for Google Music. I have a net book running Linux so I decided that having my iTunes library on Google music would be a awesome way to have my iTunes library everywhere )I don't want to pay for iCloud sync). I was excited to save hard drive space (I have less than 100gb on the netbook) and still have my library but I was disappointed when I couldn't upload about 20 songs to the service. Sure, 20 songs out of 3,000 isn't much but they were damn good songs and they were mine so why shouldn't I be able to do this?
Up till then I thought people were just whining but now I see the folly in my ways. I'm definitely for some sort of protection for content authors but there must be another way. Maybe they could have a DR,-like system that allows you to use it on X devices the same way you can authorize a number of devices to sync in iTunes. Still, we can do even better. What about a system that somehow measures ownership differently. Like maybe somehow make it so you have to use a password if you want to transfer a protected file to some other device?
Is that naive? Has it been done? I just recently changed my position on DRM so I still have much to learn. Does anyone know of something like I'm describing and is this feasible technically?
Up till then I thought people were just whining but now I see the folly in my ways. I'm definitely for some sort of protection for content authors but there must be another way. Maybe they could have a DR,-like system that allows you to use it on X devices the same way you can authorize a number of devices to sync in iTunes. Still, we can do even better. What about a system that somehow measures ownership differently. Like maybe somehow make it so you have to use a password if you want to transfer a protected file to some other device?
Is that naive? Has it been done? I just recently changed my position on DRM so I still have much to learn. Does anyone know of something like I'm describing and is this feasible technically?
As a side note, presuming that the DRMed tracks are from iTunes there is away around the problem. If you are a US user, you can sign up for iTunes Match, match the DRMed tracks, download DRM-free versions of the matched DRMed tracks and then cancel your subscription.
I think Apple would charge you for a whole month, so it probably isn't worth it for 20 tracks, but in case anyone else is in the same boat with a larger amount of music...
I think Apple would charge you for a whole month, so it probably isn't worth it for 20 tracks, but in case anyone else is in the same boat with a larger amount of music...
As another option, you always had the itunes plus option of "upgrading" your tracks to the non-drm versions. I upgraded my last drm purchase about 2 years ago according to the timestamp.
Itunes has been drm free for some time now, drm on music is quite... quaint by now.
Itunes has been drm free for some time now, drm on music is quite... quaint by now.
It is just very very hard to do. You have to get all these different device manufactors together to sign up and agree on how you measure a device. If my phone breaks and my phone company gives me a new one of the same model as replacement, does that count? What if it breaks and I buy one myself off amazon and claim it of my phone insurance, does that count? What if my phone is stolen? Does that count? For computers, it's even more complicated. It's a Sisyphean task and someone will get burned.
As a reader, this does not strike me as against my interests in the long run. I get books teleported to my Kindle instantly -- what isn't to like? (They're cheap, too, but that isn't a huge win for me. I'd pay twice as much as I do currently without thinking twice.) A shame about Charlie's publisher. They've sold me minimally $200 worth of product in the last year, I could not tell you their name if my life depended on it, and they bring precisely zero value to me relative to any other publisher aside from having signed Charlie. If Amazon signs Charlie instead, it will be literally impossible for me to identify any way in which my life changes at a consequence.