Slashdot Mirror


Top Authors Make eBook Deal, Bypassing Publishers

RobotRunAmok writes "Home to 700 authors and estates, from Philip Roth to John Updike, Jorge Luis Borges, and Saul Bellow, the Wylie Agency shocked the publishing world yesterday when it announced the launch of Odyssey Editions. The new initiative is selling ebook editions of modern classics, including Lolita, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and Updike's Rabbit tetralogy, exclusively via Amazon.com's Kindle store, leaving conventional publishers out of the picture. The issue boils down to who holds digital rights in older titles published before the advent of ebooks, with publishers arguing that the ebook rights belong to them, and authors and agents responding that, if not specifically granted, the digital rights remain with the author. Publishers and authors are also at loggerheads over the royalty that should be paid for ebooks: authors believe they should be getting up to double the current standard rate of 25%, because ebooks are cheaper to produce than physical editions. (Amazon pays authors 70%.)"

76 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. A good idea by sa666_666 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As far as I'm concerned, this is a very good thing. Any time one can get remuneration to the actual content creators instead of the middle-men is a good idea in my book. Now, maybe the prices will drop a little on these things. And in the future, maybe the movie industry can move this way too (yeah, I know, wishful thinking).

    1. Re:A good idea by cob666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I Agree, if ebooks are cheaper to produce then they should cost a fraction of what paper books cost. I should not have to pay 7.99 for an ebook when the physical book costs 3.99 at the book store.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
    2. Re:A good idea by ClaraBow · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are selling these editions at 9.99$. It seems a bit hight to me.

    3. Re:A good idea by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only thing I don't like about this is the Amazon exclusivity. (Unless Amazon offers DRMed eBooks in formats other than the Kindle's - I haven't looked into that too much, but I understand that eBook DRM is at least semi-standardized.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    4. Re:A good idea by tixxit · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think the idea is for the authors to get more money on a sale of their book, rather than making the e-books cheaper.

    5. Re:A good idea by straponego · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And there's plenty of middle ground for both.

    6. Re:A good idea by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed. I'm one of those who still boycott Amazon over its 1-click patent, and will continue to do so until that patent expires.
      Which means that anything sold exclusively on Amazon will be a sale they won't make to me (and others who still continue that boycott), and the money is spent elsewhere, quite possibly on competitors.

      For books, I much prefer the PeanutPress format (also known as ereader) for "locked" books, as the format is device agnostic, and I can read the same book I purchased on my PDA, my laptop, my cell phone or my Nook e-ink reader. I'm not locked down to one provider, and can continue to read AND transfer the books between devices even if Barnes and Noble should go out of business one day.

      Why people willingly go for locked down technologies like Kindle and iTunes, I'll never understand. Is it just because of the hype?

    7. Re:A good idea by Kryptonian+Jor-El · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whoever holds the copyright?? Actors, writers, directors, cameramen are all for-hire. Just like if a band hires a temp drummer, he is for hire and does not gain any of the copyrights to any songs he helps the band record, same for those rolls above. I'd assume the copyright is held by the executive producers and the movie studios, of course, and they cant cut themselves out...

      --
      All your 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 are belong to us
    8. Re:A good idea by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's only a good thing because they're not bound by a publisher, so they can further license their book rights. Kindle books are a tyranny.

    9. Re:A good idea by b0bby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $10 is too high for older books; even on Amazon itself, you can get a used copy of London Fields for $4 ($0.01 + 3.99 s/h). One of these days I'll get an ereader, but it will likely not be a Kindle. Their DRM is bad enough, but the ability to mess with stuff already bought & the refusal to support epub is the final straw. I'll stick with my trusty Palm Tungsten for now, my eyes are still ok.

    10. Re:A good idea by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why people willingly go for locked down technologies like Kindle and iTunes, I'll never understand.

      Then I'll explain it: convenience. Kindle and iTunes work and are affordable.

      The Kindle software group has done a decent job getting their reader software on a bunch of different platforms. Install the software and your library shows up.

      iTunes is mostly selling MP3's these days and it doesn't get much safer than that.

      Once upon a time, books were expensive and well made. These days, they are cheap and start yellowing before you are done reading them. Many publishers have even started using crappy paper for hard covers. As a result, I've started looking at books about the same way as I do a magazine. Read and toss. eBooks hang around longer on my hard drive (or in my Kindle library), but I don't have any real attachment to them.

      I can see if you are a physical book collector or like to maintain a collection, eBooks will seem stupid. To each his own.

    11. Re:A good idea by rwven · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm less concerned with the prices dropping and more concerned with passing more of the benefit straight to the person who deserves it. Publishers, in general, are simply too greedy and controlling.

    12. Re:A good idea by jgagnon · · Score: 3, Informative

      You realize that Amazon has a Kindle reader on many platforms, like the PC, Kindle reader, iPad, iPhone, Mac, and Linux... It's not like you have to buy a Kindle device to read the ebooks.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    13. Re:A good idea by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ack! I said MP3s and I really meant to say unencumbered files. I guess in my mind the two are equivalent.

    14. Re:A good idea by hgriggs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They go for it because of the convenience. You might have other options open to you, but regular folks just want to click a few buttons and have the book on the device and ready to read. They don't care about DRM or patents or rights or morality. They just want the book there, and they don't want to have to think about it, or go to any extra effort to satisfy someone else's views on right or wrong.

    15. Re:A good idea by gorzek · · Score: 4, Informative

      The issue isn't one of copyright but contract. Actors, writers, and directors in particular are all bound by contracts--either the boilerplate contracts from their respective guild (SAG, WGA, DGA) or a specific contract for the film in question. Those establish royalties and may or may not permit additional control over the film.

      To use a film clip in a TV show, for instance, you may need permission not only from the studio, but also from the actors, writers, and director, depending on how their contracts were negotiated. Even if you're the studio that owns the film, you would have to do this.

      A studio may have exclusive distribution rights for a film but that doesn't mean they have unfettered control over its use or get all the royalties. When it comes to major studio films, who holds the copyright just isn't that important because so many contracts are involved that divide control and proceeds among so many people.

    16. Re:A good idea by Suki+I · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not a plug, not even linking or naming any of our books.

      Expanding your first point, you can read them on iPad, iPhone, iPod, Blackberry, MAC, and PC. I like the way they look on my iPhone better than on an actual Kindle, but I can see why most people prefer the bigger screen.

      As soon as I saw this article I cheered that the publisher of my only story is the same as these famous authors :) Need to pass this on to my friend I help with his books too.

      E-Junkie.Com provides PDF hosting. On our stuff there, has some DRM (can print I forgot how many copies, can copy and paste too) but we are aware that those measures can be sidestepped.

      Scribd.Com is a new place he has posted his free book and all of our stuff is available in paperback. They also sell eBooks in multiple formats.

      As for "no DRM", if we wanted our works out there totally free, that is the way we would do it. His second book is and it still gets Amazon and paperback sales, but lower than the others. On Scribd.Com it has been read thousands of times, lots of free downloads from E-Junkie.com.

      All of the stories are priced low, most below $4, except for one that is a collection of the first four books. Kindle has a preview function and they are also on Google Books where 20% (or 30%, can't remember) can be browsed without having to buy.

    17. Re:A good idea by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hate grammar nazis and pedantic asses - but check your math. I think your fingers got ahead of your brain, lol

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    18. Re:A good idea by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why people willingly go for locked down technologies like Kindle and iTunes, I'll never understand. Is it just because of the hype?

      Because DRM doesn't work. I have a kindle. One of the first thing I did was crack the drm on my old mobi ebooks that I had and put them on there. One of the first things I did on getting a new phone, before the kindle app was released, was to crack the drm on my kindle ebooks and toss them on there. It's not perfect yet, only about 75% of them were able to be cracked. But I consider it almost impossible that this will still be the case when I'm ready to try a new device.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    19. Re:A good idea by localman57 · · Score: 4, Funny

      my trusty Palm Tungsten for now, my eyes are still ok.

      Not for long. According to what I was told as an adolecent, if you Palm your Tungsten too often, you'll go blind.

  2. Good! by rotide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Publishers, whether it be of music, books, etc, all seem to have this idea that they are entitled to more of the profits than the people who actually _created_ the work.

    Now, in the case of physical items, such as printed books, etc, there is the issue of mass producing it, distribution, deals with resellers, etc, etc. I can see where merely _creating_ the original can potentially pale in comparison to the work it takes to actually make/move/sell the item.

    But, in the case of digital distribution, it takes next to nothing to make after the initial eBook/PDF is created. Merely the cost of duplicating those bits which equates to a tiny amount of electricity and then a little bit more plus bandwidth to push the item. Pennies. Sold with a _heafty_ profit margin.

    Why would a publisher need to take all this profit? Or even a large percentage? They have next to no costs associated with the make/move/sell aspect of digital distribution. Sure, some guy at the end of the road, such as Amazon, needs an online storefront to actually make the sale, but beyond that these things are pretty much on par with Star Trek Replicators. Poof! another copy! Poof! Ten million more!

    Damn straight the creators get the majority of the cut on this form of media/distribution. No need for presses, warehouses, massive shipping requirements, shelf space, etc, etc, etc.

    1. Re:Good! by Councilor+Hart · · Score: 2, Funny

      mouth-to-mouth review sites Does a good product even need marketing? Or is marketing just to make you buy crap you didn't even want in the first place.

    2. Re:Good! by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see where entitlement is involved in any way. Publishers/distributors offer a set of terms to which a content creator can agree or not. There is no 'why' or any balancing of who contributed what, just terms freely offered and freely accepted by the two parties involved.

      You could argue that prior to widespread digital distribution there was no practical way to distribute content on large scale without entering into an agreement above, but that is just acknowledgement of the value that the distributors are offering in their contracts.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    3. Re:Good! by GreyyGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Coward, most of the time (unless it is a big name writer) the person doing the marketing is the author themselves.

    4. Re:Good! by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Seems to me that the literary agents are already doing marketing for their clients to publishers, for ebooks they could take the same cut they are now and go right to the distributor. "Hey Jeff baby, I got this book that'd be perfect in eBook/PDF for your Kindle and bring you loads of moolah. Lets do lunch."

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    5. Re:Good! by Local+ID10T · · Score: 2, Informative

      so in your idealized world, who does the marketing?

      Ideally? No one does. Social networking and word-of-mouth is all that is needed.

      Realistically? The retailer does most of the marketing while the author does a smaller portion themselves.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    6. Re:Good! by straponego · · Score: 2, Informative

      Marketing? I don't think I've ever bought a book I've seen an advertisement for. In my idealized world, nobody does the marketing.

    7. Re:Good! by ergrthjuyt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      all seem to have this idea that they are entitled to more of the profits

      Just a small nitpick: taking a larger share of gross revenue != more of the profits. Legitimate expenses such as editing and marketing come into play. There isn't anything I know of that indicates that publishers are getting more of the actual profits. Otherwise I agree with your assertion.

      What I do find interesting is how closely related all of this is to music piracy and DRM. Everyone on slashdot seems to think it is a crime to want to sell music with drm, and conclude that the artist deserves to be pirated for such an offense. However, I don't see that argument being made here with respect to ebooks.

      The drm and copyright problem is more sinister and nuanced than most people realize. Many people argue that music artists shouldn't have the right to sell their music, they should give it away for free and perform live to make their livings.

      What would the book authors do?

    8. Re:Good! by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In this case, I'm assuming works like Lolita, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, etc. don't need marketing. For new authors, the huge up-front costs of advances, binding, distribution, etc. are gone (for digital distribution), reducingt publishing houses to simple marketing. If you're a new author, you just hire a marketing firm, which will not demand 75% of the profit, and distribute via Amazon or other no/low cost model.

    9. Re:Good! by rotide · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, if you sign your rights away to the digital version of your work, it's theirs. Not arguing that point in any way. But for those that haven't explicitly signed away any rights/privileges/licenses to their digital versions, it should be theirs.

      No one can say that they have some implicit right to your version of work that isn't already covered by a contract. It just doesn't work that way, and rightfully so.

    10. Re:Good! by rwv · · Score: 4, Informative

      They have next to no costs associated with the make/move/sell aspect of digital distribution.

      Devil's Advocate here. Publishers are entrenched in the front lines of the multi-Billion dollar literature industry. They pay graphical artists to come up with book covers that reflect the nature of the book. This is a cost that does not go away when transitioning to electronic distribution. They pay copy editors to refine the style and grammar of a manuscript. Authors actually make many mistakes while writing their stories... and it would be a shame to sell thousands of copies where the word "teh" pops up three or four times. Marketing and advertising costs... whether through new or traditional media are significant. Though, even using new media, Facebook pages don't create and maintain themselves. It take one or two full time staff to properly drive eyeballs to the advertisements so that sales can be made.

      I'm not arguing that publishers aren't charging too much. I'm just pointing out that their role is not completely diminished because of a shift from print to digital.

    11. Re:Good! by butterflysrage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Problem with that is good old fashioned price fixing. "We will give you 20%, nothing more", next guy says "We will give you 20%, nothing more" third guy says.... well you get the idea.

      For a physical book, you can not do any serious volume without signing on to a major publisher, and they have you by the short hair (and they know it) because they have total control over the market.

      Signed
      A "slightly" bitter author

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    12. Re:Good! by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you bought a book off of a big-chain's shelf? There's heavy marketing to get books on those shelves...

      (Just because marketing isn't to the final consumer doesn't mean it doesn't exist.)

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    13. Re:Good! by butterflysrage · · Score: 2, Informative

      They pay graphical artists to come up with book covers that reflect the nature of the book
      sometimes, often it is paied out of the money they would have given to the author

      They pay copy editors to refine the style and grammar of a manuscript.
      HA! Maybe if you are JK Rowling... everyone else has to have their own editing.

      Marketing and advertising costs
      Again, usually either non existant except for extremely popular books (*twitch* Twilight *twitch*), or fronted for the author to be paid back later out of their sales.

      The majority of actual costs publishers have to deal with are getting dead trees to print the book on, and getting the physical books to stores.

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    14. Re:Good! by butterflysrage · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Now, in the case of physical items, such as printed books, etc, there is the issue of mass producing it, distribution, deals with resellers, etc, etc. I can see where merely _creating_ the original can potentially pale in comparison to the work it takes to actually make/move/sell the item.

      Obviously you have never written a book. My husband has been working on his fantasy novel for 10 years, tweaking it, changing it, improving it. Find me a single publisher that would spend 10 years developing the marketing or infrastructure to sell a book

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    15. Re:Good! by IICV · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well that's the other thing - it costs almost $0 for Amazon (or anyone with any sort of real IT infrastructure) to publish an eBook. They don't have to gear up a print run, they don't have to haggle for commercial shelf space, they don't even have to pay shipping - all they do is put a 1 MB file in their multi-petabyte storage cloud, make a page based on that one template they've been using since 2000, and set the price. Every cent they get after doing that is almost pure profit.

      At that point, Amazon would be stupid to not publish every eBook they can get their hands on.

    16. Re:Good! by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because so much has went into the *promotion* of these authors back when they were nobodies. It's real easy for a writer to go indie after he/she has become famous. But they forget about those early years when the publisher/newspaper/studio was taking a chance on them, and helping to promote them. Seems a little unfair to dump your publisher after you get the fame that they helped you achieve. It would be different if these authors has *started out* as indies.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    17. Re:Good! by LandDolphin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      None, because the return on investment would be horrible. Your husband's return on time invested would be better spent being a day laborer outside of Home Depot. He's doing this for the love of the book and not the business aspect of it. Most professional authors wouldn't spend that much time on a single book unless they were doing it as a side project and more of a personal project then a professional project.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    18. Re:Good! by ISoldat53 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or the editing. Have you read many blogs lately. An editor, even in electronic media, is still needed. But I applaud the writers getting more of the profit from creating the work.

    19. Re:Good! by MozeeToby · · Score: 3, Interesting

      10 years, or 10 'man-years'? Heh, I bet they spend a man-year just loading the books onto and off of trucks (lets see, 8 hours a day, 1 hour to unload per store... if they sell at ~3000 stores that seems valid), never mind printing, editing, promoting, and selling. Don't get me wrong, that your husband has worked tirelessly for 10 years shows that he has much more dedication than a publisher ever would, but in terms of cost the publisher's are going to be higher.

    20. Re:Good! by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps Amazon could be that marketing model. Between product referrals and ratings, it only takes a couple people taking a chance on a product to get you in the mix. And maybe there'd be a system added where you can rate/refer your own book and offer, say, the first 10 free on the condition they write a review and rate it. Then let Amazon ratings and suggestions take over. Want a new book? Got to Amazon and see what's recommended based on your other book purchases. Amazon may do it for free because it drives sales. And the only ones hurt are the traditional publishers.

      Though there are a lot of books that need a publisher/editor that people think are ready and just aren't. So we'll have to see if that's a good thing.

    21. Re:Good! by Unequivocal · · Score: 3, Funny

      You sir sound like someone who knows how businesses are run. What are you doing on slashdot?

    22. Re:Good! by butterflysrage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't write a book 9-5. You live it. I can't count the number of nights I've woken up and found him madly scribbling down some idea he came up with while laying in bed so he won't forget it by the next morning (hell I've done this several times on my own book). So yes, I would call it 10 "man-years" as you don't really get to 'stop' being creative if you want to write anything worth reading.

      There is also the question of how you define "work". Ya, you have to pay those loaders minimum wake to move box A to truck B. I've done that kind of job, it's painful work, it's annoying work, but it is far from what I would call "hard work". You are told what to do, when to do it, and when you are done you are done... creating doesn't have that. No one can tell you how to write a book, there are no forklifts to make it easier either, there is no whistle at the end of the shift to let you know you can stop and go home.

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    23. Re:Good! by mmontalvo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There have been multiple studies that show the majority of the cost is not the printing of the actual book but on editing, and advertisement. The printing is an average of about 10% of the cost. Take a look at http://ireaderreview.com/2009/05/03/book-cost-analysis-cost-of-physical-book-publishing/ .

    24. Re:Good! by butterflysrage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe I missed it, but how did they gather their data? Does Harry Potter and the Next Big Thing count as one book or one million sold? Does Granny Jem's Guide to Catholic Churches in the North West count as one book or 5 sold?

      Yes, the advertisement on a very select few books can be insane, but just how many books get that treatment? Looking at it from a total books sold per publisher, yes, it can be impressive. However, when looked at amount spent on the average title the numbers trend down drastically.

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    25. Re:Good! by mmontalvo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The linked page was a breakdown for the cost per book of a hardcover. There were multiple links on that article that have even more detail on the cost breakdown. As for where they get the information, most large publishers have roughly the same costs. I have had some conversations with some authors and a few small time publishers I know and their opinion is that those numbers are fairly accurate to actual costs. I do believe the articles was more in line to the average selling book and not to the big names authors. To compare Harry Potter to Granny Jem's Guide to Catholic Churches is a bit weird. Advertisement would probably be different but the overall editing costs are probably the same.

    26. Re:Good! by bws111 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems that you think marketing consists only of consumer-level advertising. The B&N Unbound Blog is marketing. Their Friday giveaway is marketing.

      You could write the best book in the world, but until someone other than yourself knows about it you are not going to sell a single copy. As soon as you tell someone, you have begun marketing it. Next, it does no good at all to have thousands (millions?) of people clamoring for your book if they can't buy it anywhere. So before you have consumers wanting your book, you better convince the retailers that this is going to be a best-seller so that they can stock up on it. That is marketing (and is in fact the real heavy-duty marketing as far as books are concerned).

    27. Re:Good! by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seems a little unfair to dump your publisher after you get the fame that they helped you achieve.

      They would dump you in a hot second if it made financial sense.
      The business world and Joe Average have long been playing by different sets of rules...
      Mostly to the detriment of Joe Average.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    28. Re:Good! by SydShamino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seems a little unfair to dump your publisher after you get the fame that they helped you achieve. It would be different if these authors has *started out* as indies.

      Then why didn't the publisher insist on a contract that included all of the author's output for the rest of his or her life, published in any medium?

      Are you trying to imply that the poor, defenseless publisher was roped into signing an inferior contract by a big, powerful no-name author? If the publisher helped make the author famous, then clearly the author was not famous when they signed their first contract with the publisher. In every case the publisher chose to promote them and their work knowing the contract would end.

      Should the company that first hired you in your chosen field be able to prevent you from ever working again? It's very likely that you learned a lot in your first professional job, so you were learning and building your resume at the same time. Seems unfair to dump your employer after you get the experience that they helped you achieve.

      Your post isn't the first time I've heard your argument. But it's a very, very anti-freedom argument.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    29. Re:Good! by bws111 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is plenty of competition in those markets. The question is: who is competing for what? Are publishers competing for authors, or are authors competing to be published? If you are a best-selling author, then publishers will compete for you. They may try to one-up each others percentages, or offer stronger promotion, or any number of things to win that author. However, if you are an author competing to be published, then it is YOU who must offer better terms. If other authors are willing to settle for 20%, you are not going to get higher than that. If you really want to be published, you need to be willing to DROP your take, not complain that they won't give you more.

    30. Re:Good! by Ephemeriis · · Score: 2, Informative

      The B&N Unbound Blog is marketing. Their Friday giveaway is marketing.

      Yes, it is. It is marketing being conducted by Barnes & Noble, not whoever publishes the books.

      In the fine article, we're talking about a number of authors who've bypassed their publishers to sell directly on Amazon. Amazon can go right ahead and market things. The publishers are not necessary.

      You could write the best book in the world, but until someone other than yourself knows about it you are not going to sell a single copy. As soon as you tell someone, you have begun marketing it.

      Yes, I have begun marketing it - without involving a publisher.

      And these days I can potentially reach millions of people simply by posting something on my blog, or on Slashdot, or on Facebook, or wherever. All without requiring the services of a publisher.

      Next, it does no good at all to have thousands (millions?) of people clamoring for your book if they can't buy it anywhere.

      I could host the book on-line and accept donations. Or I could use one of several on-line ebook publication services. There's absolutely no need for me involve a traditional book publisher.

      So before you have consumers wanting your book, you better convince the retailers that this is going to be a best-seller so that they can stock up on it.

      You're talking about brick & mortar retailers, and physically stocking up on paper books, aren't you?

      Because this article, and my comments, are aimed at digital ebooks.

      If you're doing digital distribution, nobody needs to stock up. And it isn't too hard to convince folks to stock digital products. They don't take up any shelf space. There's no trade-off between some no-name and someone famous. You can throw both of them on your digital storefront and let them sell whatever they want.

      That is marketing (and is in fact the real heavy-duty marketing as far as books are concerned).

      As I said before, and just clearly illustrated, it is no longer necessary to have a publisher do your marketing for you.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  3. What took so long? by Rivalz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously I understand publishing a book in multiple languages and in multiple countries is a big deal but they should have saw this one coming for a long time now. If you are the middle man and technology rears it's ugly head prepare to be marginalized or bypassed completely.
    I cannot wait for the day when this happens to Lawyers.

    1. Re:What took so long? by easterberry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You mean when we invent artificial intelligence? (in before lawyer intelligence joke) Because lawyers aren't middle men. They are paid exclusively to research, think, debate, create documents and do other things that a computer can't. Lawyers aren't middle men in any way shape or form.

    2. Re:What took so long? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Informative

      What took so long was that the publishers asserted that they had the rights to e-book along with the rights to phyiscal books even when the contracts explicitly mentioned "book form" but did not mention electronic format. The authors disagreed and one or more took a publisher to court over it. This is how long since the court case was settled in the authors' favor for some organization to work out a deal for a large group of authors.
      Please be aware that the publishers do own the e-book rights to most more recent titles. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next little while. Book publishers have never taken as big a chunk of the money made on books as music publishers, so their busness model is not as clearly outdated as that of music publishers (meaning that book publishers may still have time to figure out how to continue to turn a profit in the electronic distribution age).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:What took so long? by easterberry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The irony that the book publishing model is less dated than than the music industry publishing model is staggering.

    4. Re:What took so long? by Rivalz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um no I disagree they are middle men that are between us and the law. We can choose to represent ourselves if we decide thus making them middle men and not required although highly recommended and by current standards necessary.

  4. yay by Lord+Ender · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The digital revolution will continue to cut out the middle men until everyone has to actually produce something to make a living. RIAA, MPAA, and publisher parasites will no longer run the show.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  5. Guess who's next! by Haffner · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hey, look at this RIAA! This is the record label industry getting murdered, and everyone else benefiting!

    --
    "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
  6. Sounds like valid argument by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >>>"with publishers arguing that the ebook rights belong to them, and authors and agents responding that, if not specifically granted, the digital rights remain with the author."

    This is the same argument that the music industry made with DVDs. The songs were licenses for TV and Videotapes, not for dvd, and therefore the music industry demanded more money for each song used. Likewise I think it's reasonable to say: the authors only licensed for books and audio, not electronic editions.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  7. I'm not Shocked by jchawk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To be honest how can anyone be surprised at this? When books were set free from paper and placed onto the Internet it was only a matter of time before authors decided to cut out the publisher. They no longer have a need for them. Publishers should get wise and start to provide real value to the authors. If I write a book and do not require your editing, marketing or printing services why exactly do you expect to keep 75% of the sale price?

    Give it time and most large authors will just sell their ebooks directly via their own websites.

    This is exactly what the Internet is supposed to be about. Giving the little guy the chance to eliminate the need for the big guy.

    Cheers for these Authors!

    1. Re:I'm not Shocked by jahudabudy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think ebooks will do away with physical books (and I certainly hope not). The difference between reading an ebook and a physical book is so great as to make them different products in my mind. I would guess that ~75% of books I have read electronically, I ended up purchasing physical copies for the re-read.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    2. Re:I'm not Shocked by Danathar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only issue is being able to "browse" for books as a consumer. I have NO idea where a website for an author that does not exist...exists. There has to be some way for me to know and word of mouth generally is not very efficient.

    3. Re:I'm not Shocked by Garwulf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, good grief...

      THIS got marked "informative"?

      Right, I'm both an author who has worked with big publishers, and the owner and operator of a small publishing company. Let me explain what happened here.

      Rather than deal with Random House's e-book terms, Wiley founded an e-book publishing company, which will be publishing the work of his clients. This is still a publisher - it's just a new one. The dispute is over electronic reprint rights, and that will depend on the wording of the contracts that Wiley's authors signed ("first English language publication rights" includes e-book rights - "first English language print publication rights" does not).

      Now, subsidiary matters:

      1. Any new book requires editing by somebody who is not the author (the author is too close to the book to be able to edit it properly), as well as typesetting (which is harder than it sounds - my first typeset job is an embarrassment to me now), as well as some form of marketing. These are what a publisher provides, and yes, they cost money. So, while an author can go it alone, and sometimes succeed, they're usually better off with an actual publisher.

      2. Publishers make much less on books than you think. Let me provide the breakdown, based on any one of my publishing company's books with a $24.95 USD cover price:

      55% goes to the wholesaler (who then sells it on to bookstores and Amazon at a 40% discount off the cover price). So, now we're down to $11.23.

      Next we have the print cost - for a print on demand book like one of mine, we're talking anywhere from $4.00 to $8.00, depending on the page count. We'll take a middle number, so $6.00 is printing. Now we're down to $5.23. Then there's the royalties on top of that.

      Now, for larger print runs (around 1500 copies and up), offset printing is used, which cuts down on the print cost considerably. But, the wholesaler still takes 55%.

      This new publisher is going to specialize in e-books, and that makes the calculation much different. If you're just going through Amazon for distribution, then you don't have the wholesaler in the picture, and that means that rather than having a net profit (before royalties) on a $10 book being around $3.50 (very rough estimate), you can have it at around $7.00.

      But these are the factors in play. It's far more complicated than you described it, and this is certainly not a case of authors going out on their own and leaving the publishing system behind.

      --
      Robert B. Marks
      Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
    4. Re:I'm not Shocked by jahudabudy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Physical format strengths include: Underling passages, making notes in the margin, fulfills my desire to hoard (a filled bookshelf is much more satisfying than a filled Palm), ease of lending to friends (this may become moot if ebooks become ubiquitous), safely read in the tub, don't worry about losing on trips, never run out of batteries (nice for long camping/hiking trips), turning a page is satisfying in a way that scrolling over isn't. I'm sure there are others.

      This isn't to say that physical is superior to electronic, just different. I hope the obvious advantages to authors of distributing ebooks doesn't convince most of them to forgo physical publishing. One is not a substitute for the other.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
  8. Re:IANAL, blah blah by russotto · · Score: 5, Informative

    This looks like a retarded money grab and nothing more. If the author's are so sure they retain "digital rights," why doesn't one of them post a book the publisher still has the rights to, in its entirety, on a website and see what happened.

    Short answer: They've already done so, they got sued, and the publishers lost.

    Random House's standard contract specified they had the exclusive right to sell the works in "book form". The authors asserted, and the courts agreed, that "book form" did not include electronic rights.

  9. What to think of Amazon?? by Qwavel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really don't know what to think of Amazon.

    Sometimes they are great for consumers - competing fair and square with great prices and a great website.

    Their video service is available to anyone with Flash, and while many people hate Flash (and some now don't have access to it) that seemed like a good way to allow customers to view the video they purchased across a very broad range of OS's, browsers and devices.

    Then they go and do something like this, which seems to lead us to a world where different retailers control different books and have no competition in the sales of those books. This is very bad for consumers.

    This avoid competition and seems to guarantee their customers higher prices. This is the sort of thing I would expect from Apple, not Amazon. I thought Amazon was prepared to compete fairly in book sales?

       

    1. Re:What to think of Amazon?? by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This will help you sort it out - they are in it for the money! That's not a bad thing, thats what they are there for.

  10. In Soviet Russia... by Biff+Stu · · Score: 4, Funny

    The author pays the publisher.

    Wait a minute! That's how it works in academia.

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by zill · · Score: 2, Funny

      I new it! The entire school system is a commie conscipcy!

      You people may mock me for dropping out of high school, but I was right all alone!

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Have you taken a look at academia lately? This is hardly news. ;)

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    3. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Haffner · · Score: 4, Funny

      but I was right all alone!

      There's a lesson in here somewhere...

      --
      "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
  11. Re:IANAL, blah blah by vajrabum · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not only are you not a lawyer you don't know much about contracts or publishing rights either. Publishing rights are sold on a country by country basis and format by format basis. If you sell a book to be marketed in the US your publisher has no right to sell it in the UK or Australia unless they negotiate that separately. Same goes for audio books. So those advances are paid for the rights that were negotiated in the contract. Given that's the case then why would you think a pre-digital paper publishers have the right to publish digitally unless they've negotiated it or you work for a publisher who's interested in spreading FUD? The older contracts don't include those rights. Unless a contract is written specifically to allow future changes then things don't get grandfathered into a contract. They have to be renegotiated.

  12. Good for the authors, bad for consumers by Ngarrang · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I imagine that many of the authors that this greatly effects are the ones that do this as a full-time job. If no one buys their books NEW, then they see no money, or maybe no future book deal. The profit margin approaches 100% after enough time and copies have sold. This allows the good authors to write full-time and not have to worry about asking if we want fries with our order. Book sales trail off after release, so the most money is to be made in that first year, though some books enjoy a long life of sales popularity. So, good for the authors.

    This is a very bad deal for consumers, in the end. My copy of "Nothing: The History of Zero" was a fun read. Now that I am done with it, I can give it to a friend, sell it, trade it in at Half-Priced Books, etc. In this way, I can recoup some of my cost. And the book can be purchased and resold many times, profits staying in the hands of the seller each time. The author makes nothing. The DRM on the eBooks prevents you from selling it, or giving it away.

    Thus, in a sly maneuver to make big publishing look like evil bastards (not a difficult task), the authors conveniently and quietly take control of book distribution and remove the freedom of the consumer to control the end product themselves. This is bad. Very bad.

    Thus, I am conflicted. Yay for getting what you deserve to be paid. Boo for limiting my ability to resell the book.

    --
    Bearded Dragon
    1. Re:Good for the authors, bad for consumers by Shados · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Honestly, I don't get this. If you live in the middle of nowhere, you have a point. But good libraries will have virtually any book worth reading, or at least the vast majority (including tech books), and its freeeeeeeeee.

      So if you don't plan on keeping the book, why buy it in the first place? And if you're not sure, borrow it first, then buy it.

      I mean, i understand this DOES remove an option from you, but most of the time, that option was worthless in the first place.

  13. What did Amazon offer? by proxima · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What did Amazon offer to get exclusivity for two years? My hunch is that Amazon agreed to heavily promote the books on its site, and wouldn't do so if they also went to BN and Apple.

    Also, they apparently don't have the rights to decent looking book covers - the current covers are pretty ugly. Seriously - who thought it was a good idea to include quotations as cover art when it goes on devices like cell phones? Just the title and author in a decent font would do.

       

    --
    "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
  14. This is absolutely terrible by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only thing I don't like about this is the Amazon exclusivity.

    The "only thing"? I'm practically screaming about it!

    I have a Nook. It's a superior e-reader to the Kindle. (YMMV.) What this deal is saying is that I may not read any of the affected books on my Nook, period. If I prefer to read on my Nook, then POOF! These books are lost to me. Apparently, permanently. I do not understand how these authors (or their heirs) can sit still for that.

    And I know the Slashdot audience tends to read mostly fantasy and sci-fi books, but for the literature-minded among you, Jesus titty-fucking Christ! These are indeed modern classics, lost to Amazon's DRM. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas? Ellison's Invisible Man? London Fields? The Naked and the Dead? These are great books... and now I may not read them in a digital edition unless I give $199 + $10 to Amazon. Fuck me.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!