Slashdot Mirror
Offline Book "Lending" Costs US Publishers Nearly $1 Trillion
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from a tongue-in-cheek blog post which puts publisher worries about ebook piracy into perspective:
"Hot on the heels of the story in Publisher's Weekly that 'publishers could be losing out on as much $3 billion to online book piracy' comes a sudden realization of a much larger threat to the viability of the book industry. Apparently, over 2 billion books were 'loaned' last year by a cabal of organizations found in nearly every American city and town. Using the same advanced projective mathematics used in the study cited by Publishers Weekly, Go To Hellman has computed that publishers could be losing sales opportunities totaling over $100 billion per year, losses which extend back to at least the year 2000. ... From what we've been able to piece together, the book 'lending' takes place in 'libraries.' On entering one of these dens, patrons may view a dazzling array of books, periodicals, even CDs and DVDs, all available to anyone willing to disclose valuable personal information in exchange for a 'card.' But there is an ominous silence pervading these ersatz sanctuaries, enforced by the stern demeanor of staff and the glares of other patrons. Although there's no admission charge and it doesn't cost anything to borrow a book, there's always the threat of an onerous overdue bill for the hapless borrower who forgets to continue the cycle of not paying for copyrighted material."
Don't give them any ideas.
The copyright circus is stupid enough already.
Libraries are nothing but effete businesses designed to rip off the publishing industry and fill innocent victims' minds with confusing, dangerous propaganda! A. Hitler, spokesman, RIAA
Sunlight costs lightbulb makers nearly 100 bazillion dollars!
Set your phasers on "funky"!
I am irked by the phrase "advanced projective mathematics." This to me is a red flag warning me of some business school BS coming up.
When the authorities have requested copies of patrons borrowing records, the libraries almost always refuse to provide it without a search warrant!
If I could "own" (even with DRM) a book for $2.50, I would never bother making a trip to a library. Even at lower prices, publishers could increase their profits substantially by bypassing the libraries.
Notorious hacker group "The Librarians" thumbed their collective noses today at the intellectual property industry as they investigated new ways to channel IP into the hands of teenagers.
"I got this great new bag today," said one student, "and realized I needed a few novels to put in it." [Editor's note: we believe the term "bag" is street for a memory storage device.]
One self-proclaimed member of this criminal organization stated "The biggest challenge with kids today is getting access to reading material. Many come from poorer families and depend on the free availability of reading material to supplement their school-provided education." She continued, "That's why today we're announcing a reading competition, with the winner awarded a really wonderful bag to store their materials in."
When pressed for clarification, this member stated "Of course all the reading materials would be provided for free. That is the whole purpose of what we do." Upon further research, it is believed that local and federal funds are being diverted for these activities.
Organizations representing intellectual property owners did not immediately answer calls. [Editor's note: we let the phone ring once, then hang up. If they can't answer their calls in less than one ring, it's not immediate enough for us.]
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
While funny, the point of the article is quite saddening. People have been involved in 'socialist' activities since before we were human and only just recently, has it become something of a curse to help one another out (sharing) at the expense of a Corporation potentially losing a sale opportunity.
Don't get me wrong, Corps have to make money, but there has been an amazing full court press of propaganda that has twisted the case for helping and sharing the burden to some degree as socialism or communism (and for the Republicans out there, I'll add Fascism, since it ends in an ism).
We won't even talk about all the infrastructure that government puts in place because, well, that is a form of socialism too, and its far better to little to no government so everyone can look after themselves.
I wonder who would be best able to take care of themselves in such a scenario, individual voters and their families or large corporations (since they have most of the benefits of being a 'person' but none of the responsibilities)?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/books/19sherlock.html
dear all creators:
no, it does not make any fucking sense that your grandchildren should profit from a story you wrote, a song you sang, a movie you directed, whatever
it simply does NOT make sense. it is an intellectually and philosophically corrupt concept
intelletual property law only deserves to be disrespected, fought, and subverted. intellectual property law is a parasitical drain on our culture. intellectual property law must be destroyed. it is not of any benefit to anyone except certain entrenched well-connected, well-lawyered interests
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
That's nothing. The Economist once had a cover with two copulating camels (the female didn't look to happy). For a brief moment in history, economists figured out that 1 + 1 = 3. If you don't know where the extra one came from, you haven't spent enough time in the "medical journal" section.
This is what happens when a government runs the value of their money to the ground by over-spending/borrowing. The purchasing power of the average family goes down and they start making tough choices about where their money goes. Things like overpriced cable television, unnecessary luxury trips, entertainment purchases (books, movies, music), and other non-essential items don't get purchased. Instead of the Corporations facing this reality and coming up with quality products that have value, they instead blame 'piracy' for their woes.
Sorry Corporations, food and gas to get to work is more important than a $30 Blue-Ray movie, especially when I is delivered a few weeks later at my door via my Netflix queue. Used video games are more attractive (even bargain bin ones) than $60 for the latest greatest, and if I am desperate I can rent for $3 at Hollywood Video. Radio is free and generally will play something worth listening to, so that song better be really good for me to spend even $0.99 on it (Ke$ha need not apply).
These days I use the library, netflix, rentals, borrowing, ebay, or any other legal means to save a buck on entertainment these days. Even if that means just playing cards with the family or going to the park.
Voting them all out of office, now that's change I can believe in.
The only problem is that it isn't completely accurate. It portrays libraries as quiet places where people will glare at you if you make too much noise. In the past, that used to be true, but not any more, at least here in Arizona. Now, kids run wild, and people chitchat on their cellphones at full volume in library common areas, and librarians don't do anything about it because it's become futile.
It'd be nice to live in a civilized city where people really were quiet in libraries.
These are the people arguing against making publicly funded research publicly available. Here's the full article: Pat Schroeder's New Chapter.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
You wouldn't steal a car! You wouldn't steal a DVD! Don't steal books either!
When I was growing up, my family did not have a lot of money. Almost all the books I read were borrowed from a library. As I got older, my mom and dad moved in to better jobs, and some of my books were purchased. By the time I was in high school and college, the only time I went to the library was to do research for school papers.
Now that I make good money, I never to go the library. I buy all my books (from independent book stores if I can).
Like any good drug dealer they need to keep the first "hit" free.
Any ebook that's more expensive than the corresponding paperback is INSANE.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Their "Campaign to Promote Illiteracy" will be mandatory in most schools in the next semester. Students will be treated to videos with titles such as "Johnny Can't Read"; older classes will be subjected to aversion therapy with pop-up books such as "My Pet Goatse" and "Animal Farm-sex".
They'll also be promoting their new android-based phone, which enables illiterates to send "text" messages using only pictures, so that texting becomes a game of rebus. For example, he message "Can I see you tonight?" becomes
"picture of a tin can" = "can", +
"picture of an eye" = "eye", +
"picture of waves" = "sea", +
picture of a female goat" = "ewe", +
"picture of dog poop" = "number 2" +
"picture of a knight on a horse" = "knight"
"can eye sea ewe 2 knight" = "can I see you tonight"
Wherever did you get this silly idea? Libraries pay the same discounted rate as bookstores, usually in the neighborhood of 45-55% BELOW retail. Most books are purchased from Ingram or Baker & Taylor, wholesalers. If you do the math on this, it winds up that a million dollar book budget buys 2 million dollars worth of books. (Take the 45% you just saved; buy more books. Take the 45% you just saved; buy more books. Repeat until funds=0.) I supervised the Technical Services Department of my library (and IT) for 25 years, which included the book budget.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
Fact 1: Public libraries are just about the best return on investment for your tax dollar. For every dollar you spend supporting the public library, you get about $8.00 back in services. If you had to pay retail (or even discounted) for every book borrowed from the public library, that's the ROI you would see. Name another government organization that can give you a better ROI. (Note: You can't.)
Fact 2: If you have a recession, usage of the public library goes up. Ironically, the library budget is subject to the recession as much as any other business or government entity. For most businesses, if traffic goes up, so does income. It's the opposite for a public library.
Fact 3: If it were not for public libraries, many books would not be published at all. That's because publishers factor in the public library market in their decision to publish. Larger public libraries buy a given title in the hundreds of copies. There are over 16,000 public libraries in the US. The market is not trivial.
Fact 4: Public libraries are largely responsible for publishers' 'Backlists' of older titles. Nobody else buys them.
Fact 5: It is an established fact that people who use public libraries buy far more books than people who do not. Public libraries help create the market that gives profits to publishers.
Fact 6: Research libraries, especially, are a captive audience for the over-priced, rip-off "scientific" journals that cost hundreds, even thousands of dollars a year that academics "must have." No individual can afford them. If libraries "just said no" those journals would fail in a heartbeat.
Fact 7: Cutting off libraries is a stupid idea. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
You spelled his name wrong; that's GNU/Stallman