Libraries Are The Best Counter To Piracy... So Of Course Publishers Are Trying To Limit Them

from the that-other-foot-still-looks-perfectly-functional! dept

Fri, Jan 13th 2012 5:28am — Mike Masnick

Interesting blog post by Peter Brantley over at Publishers' Weekly last week, mocking the big publishers for supporting SOPA/PIPA, despite the fact that it (1) won't stop much, if any, infringement, but (2) will have massive unintended consequences. The first half of the post focuses on SOPA/PIPA and uses the recent Cory Doctorow talk we wrote about to highlight how this is yet another example of old line content businesses not understanding how the technology works. So, he explains how these publishers shot themselves in the foot by not understanding the tech and basic economics:

Instead of heeding Tim O�Reilly�s 10 year old lesson that making content available in desirable places under terms that users accept is the most profitable path, publishing has implicitly decided to attempt to control something they have no adequate understanding of, and can never really control: computing and the internet. They�ve shot themselves in the foot.

But, from there, he notes that they're actually making it even worse... by going after libraries. This is something that we had recently written about as well. Publishers are increasingly trying to limit what libraries do. But as Brantley notes, libraries are actually a great weapon against unauthorized file sharing, so trying to limit them is doubly stupid:

And what I find most darkly amusing is that they weren�t content to stop there. The one place in the book distribution ecosystem where piracy is most efficiently defeated, where users have access to content for free but under carefully controlled circumstances, have been libraries. Libraries have always been the best counter to piracy. And instead of cementing a relationship with libraries that works to the benefit of all parties, publishers have steadfastly withdrawn the ability of libraries to provide free content, even when it is available for only limited borrowing periods, or only a restricted number of titles, with severe constraints on sharing and copying. Instead, they have indicated an interest in the commercialization of libraries by encouraging rental models.

This is all too common in the legacy entertainment business. Rather than understanding stuff, they just keep shooting themselves in the foot. Even worse? They then blame everyone else for it, too.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, ebooks, libraries, limitations

83 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:49am

"Even worse? They then blame everyone else for it, too."

And like a immature teenager that will never grow up, they can never learn from the mistakes that are not "theirs'".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymous, 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:53am

i think the operative phrase is 'old line content businesses not understanding how the technology works'. not only that but the thick fuckers DONT WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS OR HOW IT WOULD BENEFIT THEM!

if ever there was a generation that ought to be put down, it has to be this generation of dithering old farts that still think the world is flat! unbelievable!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:55am

Send them a Message with your Wallet
Join a Boycott and really try to do something.If like me you truly believe in Freedom,Our Constitution, and a non-Censored Life then you must take a stand now.
1.Stop supporting the Companies who support Censorship
2.Call up and write to your Reps
3.All Reps who support Censorship you should Vote out of Office
4.IT Techie Geeks should figure out ways to "out" their financial statements of donations in Washington
5.Wikileak all the dirt and "out" that to the World
6.Do not buy any New products from RIAA,MPAA,Big Publishers,etc.
If you truly want to do something then be a man and stand by your beliefs.And make sure to tell all of your friends.Use Facebook and change your profile picture to your photo with text saying NO SOPA/PIPA,etc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Violated (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:58am

The value of free.
To commercialise the public libraries is so not a plan that would work out. It seems they have forgotten the value of "free"

Due to limited storage space it is usually an honour to have your book available and in many cases they would go with award winners or well known powerful titles.

It is then logical that such books become part of the public culture which is much more financially rewarding. Being the one always requested and sought, large book store sales, or maybe even documentaries or film deals.

So these money addicts are morons. Governments would not allow it anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- David Muir (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:05am
  
  Re: The value of free.
  Governments would not allow it anyway.
  
  Because governments can be trusted to have the public interest always at heart and never slip into bed with the richest and slickest... oh wait.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Violated (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:07am
    
    Re: Re: The value of free.
    I stand by my statement when no Government would commercialize the public library system. Not even a dictatorship would go that far.
    
    If you think about it then it is the poor people who most use the public library. So who are these poor?
    
    1. School Children needing books for their homework or research projects. Even children's books to enjoy which helps kids from uncaring parents to improve their life.
    
    2. College and University students needing books for their assignments. The same class of people who live far below the minimum wage and who have to scavenge food. I remember my pre-Internet college days when I had to physically switch libraries to find better quality books.
    
    3. The disabled and the elderly. These are also usually low income people either looking to improve their education or simply to find a hot novel to get engrossed in.
    
    Any politician who puts forwards a plan to commercialise the public library is only working on political suicide. They would be attacked by everyone for wanting to hurt school kids, children of poor family, college students, the whole education system, the disabled and the elderly.
    
    This is why the copyright side attack the public library system directly and to not do this in politics. You can also see their love of money outranks all else.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:59am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The value of free.
      I would agree, but from what I have seen lately, I think they would just slip it into an unrelated bill as an amendment and get it passed...
      
      these are the same kinda of idiots who support sopa/pipa/dmca exct, despite not understanding anything to do with how they would work(not work)
      
      hell, its so bad that publishers are once again trying to find ways to stop people buying/selling used books again....just like the mafiaa have over the years....
      
      I have a friend who works at one of the largest used book stores in the country, and they have been asked/threatened for years off and on over used book sales....its idiotic....but thats what you get when you deal with greedy rich fukers who have a massive sense of entitlement...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Violated (profile), 14 Jan 2012 @ 2:25pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: The value of free.
        That is a stupid argument they would always lose. One aspect of copyright law is that you can sell on your used DVDs, books and computer game etc.
        
        NetFlix would not even exist without that law when they buy up broadcast agreements from others.
        
        You are quite right that the copyright side never learn and always think they can stop resales. One example were DVD suppliers in Europe importing and then selling R1 titles from North America which were popular due to less censorship and better extras. Copyright Protection organizations sued them in court only to suffer an amazing defeat when beyond resale law to impose a restriction would be against the EU's free movement of goods and services mantra.
        
        You can be certain they will be back again only to crash and burn again under some other example.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btrussell (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:53am
  
  Re: The value of free.
  "Governments would not allow it anyway."
  
  "Toronto�s system is the second largest, by number of branches, and the busiest by circulation, on the continent. New York City public libraries lent out 24 million volumes in 2010; Toronto�s lent out over 32 million. The system has innovated, offering music and e-book downloads, making Internet access widely available, delivering materials to local branches, and lending out cards that give free access to local museums."
  
  "Put aside the question of whether or not Toronto Councillor and mayoral confidant Doug Ford knows what Margaret Atwood looks like or has read her books. What is shocking is his suggestion that a great literary icon should �go run in the next election and get democratically elected� if she is concerned about funding for libraries."
  
  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/margaret-atwoods-inspiring-de fence-of-torontos-libraries/article2112073/
  
  Yeah, gubberment would never go for it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Violated (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:20am
    
    Re: Re: The value of free.
    I believe he is taking about harsh budget cuts and not to establish a books for hire scheme.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btrussell (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The value of free.
      You have to start somewhere.
      
      It could be the next proposal as opposed to closing outright.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:35am

I would say.... 70% of the books I own - I either read from the library or had read another of the author's books at the library.

70% of the Movies I own, I seen free first somewhere.

98% of the music I own, I heard it free first somewhere else before buying it.

I'm just frankly tired of this - go ahead, put SOPA or whatever asinine bullshit you want - but consider that I rarely, if ever, buy something without first sampling it for *free* first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:35am

Oh and no - 30 second clips on Amazon or whatever don't cut it either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chosen Reject (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:52am
  
  Re:
  The 30 second clips on Amazon still didn't prevent me from buying the wrong version of a song I already knew I liked. That was almost 2 years ago. I've not bought a song since. I want to know I'm getting what I think I'm buying. It's not a matter of price, it's a matter of trust. The labels have shown that they don't trust me, and now I've seen I can't trust them. So I just don't do business with them anymore.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cowardly Anon, 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:38am

"Instead, they have indicated an interest in the commercialization of libraries by encouraging rental models."

This is a GREAT idea! Why hasn't anyone thought of it before? I could rent a book that costs $10 fro $2 for a week! We could set it up just like Blockbuster...

Oh wait, hasn't Blockbuster gone belly up? Isn't Dish Network closing the vast majority of them b/c the business model just couldn't compete with the digital age?

Hrm....have the publish companies actually looked at what's happening in the music and movie industry to see if how those industry's golden gooses turned out?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:41am

Mike, im sorry but how can these industries shoot themselves in the foot when there is no foot/ankle/leg left for them too shoot? :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Wifezilla (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 6:56am
  
  Re:
  They just change their aim to the consumers. If you can't force them to comply to their model, just fire at will and do as much damage as possible until you finally die.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- dave blevins (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:53am
  
  Re: shooting foot
  They are so blind to reality they can't hit their foot: they've blasted about 3 (or so) feet higher.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- TtfnJohn (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 1:04pm
  
  Re:
  They're aiming higher now at the region where thighs meet torso and often find reproductive organs. As they're going to become extinct the way they're going they might just as well shoot themselves there as well.
  
  The day of the digital library may have come and gone. Or it may be yet to come. Remember that what we call public libraries were started by private interests with the idea of taking books and learning to the public and the poor.
  
  The digial age may need to respond similarly, at least as far as the poor and indegent are concerned. (I'm making the assumption that there will be a middle class left in North America in 10 years time)
  
  As someone has already said. I discovered my love of books in libraries. Public and University libraries, mind as high school ones in my day were a sad joke. I discovered my love of music by listening to it and singing. By doing both reading and music. I found my career, accidentally, by doing it cause I was out of work at the time and took a job with a telco to save up for school, which I never did.and gardening by just doing it. And consulting books, we sites and a ton of other resources. Largely by avoiding classrooms and just learning on the job, as it were.
  
  (Not for everyone, I admit, but I'm what's called an intuitive learner and we are the ones bored to death in class, looking out the windows and skipping a ton of classes because we got it in the first two and a half weeks into the semester, and driving teachers and fellow students nuts by still pulling in great grades. After a while even that game gets dull and borning too, so we leave.)
  
  I do, I learn. I can leap and get to semester end when I want and go back and see what did right, wrong or better on.
  
  Libaries have been vital to me in that kind of learning. The way they're funded today the Internet is more up to date then public libraries are.
  
  But have publishers, recording companies, movie studios thought just once about changing to adapt to a changed situation? No, not once. They've had the chance and now of course, as Brantley points out, once again, brick and mortar location where the publishing industry could continue to thrive on paper as well as in bits and bytes, are being restricted by that industry. The Library.
  
  For the life of me I don't understand the stupidity of this.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:23am

Just who is innovating here?
This blog continues to use the word "innovate" for the work of Big Search while continuing to condemn the publishers. But who is really innovating here?

If you ask me, the librarians have the old business model. They use the first sale doctrine to get content at a low price and then they share it with their taxpayers who don't realize how much they're paying for the cash. And do the taxpayers have a choice? Nope. The tax collectors don't give them any. And don't get me started about how the governments have overpromised cushy pensions to the librarians-- pensions that the average taxpayer doesn't stand a prayer of ever seeing.

The publishers here are trying to overthrow this old business model with some real technical innovation. They want to give people the choice about what they consume. They want to spread out the costs fairly among all readers instead of letting some freeride on the purchases of others.

This is a very technical, forward-thinking innovation, but the couch potatoes on this website can't seem to grasp the amount of innovation because this website believes that only Big Search, Big Hardware and Big Piracy are capable of innovation. So anything that hurts the decade old business model of Big Search will be vilified. Sheesh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Phalamir (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:33am
  
  Re: Just who is innovating here?
  Randoid, mental defective, or troll? Maybe all three?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:40am
    
    Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
    I'd go with all three.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:47am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      Funny. That's how I see many of the people around here. They think they have a god-given right to get books for free. Somehow they think that they'll continue to magicallly appear on the library shelves without paying for their creation costs.
      
      I love to hear from people who complain when publishers wanted to limit ebooks to an arbitrary number of loans, say 26. They seem to think that letting the libraries loan out all ebooks infinitely many times is a sustainable business.
      
      Good luck with your utopian, marxian rants and trolls. You sure trolled me.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:54am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        so how do you intend to limit an infinit supply of ebooks because from where im looking at you are the one that is crazy , i mean having and infinit resource and telling your CUSTOMER i only can give you 1 is crazy.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:57am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        Nonsense. I don't see forcing people to pay as a limit. There will still be as many copies available as people want. There won't be any scarcity-- unless you consider forcing people to pay their fair share of the development costs to be "scarcity."
        
        The real scarcity appears when you don't collect the revenues. Then writers go out of business and find other work. Then there are no books around-- except perhaps books like political treatises that are cross-subsidized.
        
        So if you really want scarcity, just guarantee that writers won't get paid.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Suja (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:06am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        for a digital work that takes nothing but a couple seconds/clicks to copy you only have to pay the author once for the first copy, which can be done with kickstarter.com
        
        after that there is no need to continue paying
        
        if it was a physical work that takes physical resources and time to copy it would be different
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Suja (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:09am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        so
        
        physical work = same as now, pretty much
        
        digital work = big payment upfront before/during development then free afterwards
        
        just that would be a huge improvement over what it currently is
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:18am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        Really? What makes you think that Kickstarted is an innovation? Most of them are never funded because they can't attract enough true believers.
        
        The biggest problem is that Kickstarter forces you to buy a pig in a poke. You have no clue if that novel or non-fiction book is going to be any good at all. Heck, many writers fail to finish the books even when given an advance. I think it's mighty risky to invest with Kickstarted in a book.
        
        The current model is much better for consumers. They can wait until the writing is actually finished and professionally edited. Then they can even wait for the reviews of the finished product.
        
        Get a clue. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's really an improvement.
        
        Mind you I think that Kickstarter is good for some things, but it's a big, big risk. This is why the security laws were invented, laws that Kickstarter doesn't seem to follow.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Chosen Reject (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:58am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        How do you know you're going to like a book before you've read it? Giving money through Kickstarter before it's written is no different in that regard than giving money to a publisher after it's written. Reviews don't tell you you're going to like a book.
        
        A lady I trusted for movie reviews recommended a movie she thought was fantastic. I sat through the whole movie wondering how she of all people could like something so horrible. Reviews don't mean you're going to like it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2012 @ 12:34am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        *facepalm* You are NOT paying for the copy. You are paying for the value in the book. To say it costs no money to make a book just because it's published in an e-book is just silly. Does that author not have living expenses and whatnot just like you do? Or do you REALLY want every author to just be a hobbyist that writes for an hour a day? If that's the case, then I hope you actually like having to wait years for your favorite book to have a new installment in a series...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        btrussell (profile), 14 Jan 2012 @ 2:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        How does that work for a million years after death of author?
        
        I mean, once they are dead, doesn't matter what we pay, you will be waiting many many years for them to write another book.
        
        "You are paying for the value in the book."
        
        Who determines what its' value is?
        
        If I buy a PC, I can return it, fully refunded, no questions asked, within 30 days. Can I do that with a book? Any kind of "intellectual property?"
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        so now you show your true colors, you want to force people to pay you dont want them to have a say in the matter you just want to froce them to pay, oh! and as was said here time and time again if you want money out of a customer you NEED TO GIVE THEM A REASON TO BUY, about not having writers i dont belive that because if you have seen the fanfict of lots of people you would know there are people willing to write at a none cost and just for the joy of it, i know it won't be a 24/7 writer but he/she will take his time to finish her storie
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        Dude, get a clue and quit drinking the librarians' Kool Aid. Who forces you to contribute to their budget every April 15th? It's not the publishers. Second, who's the biggest gatekeeper on the planet? Again, it's not the publishers. The librarians decide which books end up on the shelves. If the librarians don't buy it, you don't read it at the library. Talk about censorship!
        
        Face it. The librarians are the ones with the antiquated business models who are doing the forcing. Not Amazon.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 12:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        So, we're paying the libraries to buy the books that we then read, which means they aren't for free. You're still the worst at this, bob.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 2:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        You've never been to a library have you?
        If they don't have it, ask them to get it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        clearly You have little to no understanding of how libraries function, at least out here they buy library edition book due to licensing, these books cost more then their equivalent retail versions, also they many times have hardcover versions that are smaller then the retail hardcovers(I have a set of Terry Brooks books that are library editions that are hardcovers the size of a paperback, was a gift from a friend who worked at the library)
        
        and I hate to tell you this, but I have like most readers I know, bought far more books due to library lends then anything else.
        
        I have a bunch of clancy books because I read 1 clancy novel when I was a kid as one example(rainbow six)
        
        those authors never would have gotten my money had I not first read their works "free" via a library lend....
        
        the problem here isnt paying authors, its the people at the top who dont feel they are already rich enough....
        
        Its like u2's manager who crys hes not making enough money....
        
        would be like bill gates crying hes not rich enough....
        
        and dont worry, even if somehow magically these publishing houses went out of business authors would still create, and would still find a way to get their works to the masses.
        
        some of the best writing I have read in my lifetime has been done by people who couldnt get published, some of the worst as well, but I have also read published works that where just as bad as the worst fan fiction I have ever read...
        
        honestly, publishers here need to check out whats going on in china and some other countries, its amazing how they have managed to setup a micro transation based system for authors to get started....
        
        the big publishers are NOT the friend of the average writer, they ONLY care about what they think will sell, and ONLY care that it will make THEM millions, if the person reading it for the publisher, you dont get a contract....even if your works amazing....
        
        publishers are just like the MPAA and RIAA, they are trying to hold onto an old model and its failing them baddly....infact, a few publishers I REFUSE to buy from now, act like a spoiled, entitled child and see how well it serves you...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Archillies, 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
        So poor folks that need to spend their money on food and shelter should not be educated since they can't pay for books to further englighten themselves?
        
        Why do so many people ignore the fact that all ebooks are not fiction? Libraries are an essential path in our society for persons to better themselves.
        
        So many trolls so few bridges....
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:52am
  
  Re: Just who is innovating here?
  "This blog continues to use the word "innovate" for the work of Big Search while continuing to condemn the publishers. But who is really innovating here?"
  
  This blog has not used the word "innovate" for the work of Big Search ever. Not specifically Big anything, Big [insert word here] is purely a bob thing.
  
  This blog has used the word "innovate" to describe the practices and methods being used and attempted by some specific corporations/business/individuals however.
  
  "If you ask me, the librarians have the old business model. They use the first sale doctrine to get content at a low price and then they share it with their taxpayers who don't realize how much they're paying for the cash. And do the taxpayers have a choice? Nope. The tax collectors don't give them any. And don't get me started about how the governments have overpromised cushy pensions to the librarians-- pensions that the average taxpayer doesn't stand a prayer of ever seeing."
  
  If you ask me, you sound like a complete fool with what you just said. Libraries don't have a business model per se. They purchase books, or receive donations of books, which they then FREELY check out to the public. Who helps maintain their operating cost through taxes. There's no business model at all there. We know what we're getting, our tax dollars are providing ourselves and others with freely available for all to enjoy literature. With a handful of possibly looney exceptions, I think this is acceptable to most people. We all benefit from it. As for the pension bit... well, that's your hang up. But irrelevant to the article at hand.
  
  "The publishers here are trying to overthrow this old business model with some real technical innovation. They want to give people the choice about what they consume. They want to spread out the costs fairly among all readers instead of letting some freeride on the purchases of others."
  
  No bob, the publishers here are trying to make a profit off of a public funded venture (if I may call it that). We are paying for the books and operating cost. We benefit from it. Now they want the libraries to make us pay to check out books that our tax dollars are paying for? F*ck that, to say the least. We already have a choice in what we consume, most libraries have insanely huge collections, to which people can donate freely. It is rare that you cannot find a book you want (from a classic to a modern best seller). As for spreading the cost fairly, the cost are already fairly spread. Taxes bob. Perhaps you've heard of them. The majority of people pay them in one way, shape or form. So we're all sharing the cost. No need to be charged an additional fee on top of that to enjoy something we've technically already paid for. That's just the publishers being greedy.
  
  "This is a very technical, forward-thinking innovation, but the couch potatoes on this website can't seem to grasp the amount of innovation because this website believes that only Big Search, Big Hardware and Big Piracy are capable of innovation. So anything that hurts the decade old business model of Big Search will be vilified. Sheesh"
  
  No, this is anything but technical or forward-thinking. This is the kind of move that will get them smacked down by the public. Messing with the one available means for anyone and everyone to better themselves or enjoy literature is not something any reasonable person/corporation would do. Emphasis on "REASONABLE". As for the rest of what you said, I'm not gonna bother acknowledging it. When you pretty much called PUBLIC LIBRARIES "Big Search" I started laughing literally out loud and realized that no matter how dumb you think some people are, they always manage to surprise you by setting that bar even higher (or lower).
  
  This is just a suggestion. But perhaps you should take a visit to your local Big Search and you know, read something about the things of which you know nothing about. Inform and educate yourself a bit. Go for it, I don't mind. I like knowing my tax dollars are at least on occasion going towards a good cause. Helping those with lesser intellects learn something, anything, is something I can live with.
  
  Adios bob.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:02am
    
    Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
    "I like knowing my tax dollars are at least on occasion going towards a good cause. "
    
    It's a good thing you like it because you've got no choice in the matter. Nada.
    
    "s for spreading the cost fairly, the cost are already fairly spread. Taxes bob. Perhaps you've heard of them. The majority of people pay them in one way, shape or form. So we're all sharing the cost. "
    
    Oh, I know that they're spread out, but are they really fair? How about all of those people who are left functionally illiterate by the school system. They have to pay so you can read your fancy pants novel written with big words. Face it, the library system forces all of society to pay for the entertainment of the bookworms. The guys who just want to spend the evening with a beer and a ball game have no choice but to contribute their taxes for high falutin books largely written by snobby people who look down upon them. Ain't that great?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:18am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      "It's a good thing you like it because you've got no choice in the matter. Nada."
      
      I didn't say I like paying taxes, I said I like that my tax dollars are in part going towards something that is useful and beneficial to all.
      
      Also, you do have a choice in the matter. You can choose not to pay taxes, but there are obvious risk associate with that choice. Likewise, you can choose not to work at all, thus avoiding paying taxes completely and legally.
      
      "Oh, I know that they're spread out, but are they really fair? How about all of those people who are left functionally illiterate by the school system. They have to pay so you can read your fancy pants novel written with big words. Face it, the library system forces all of society to pay for the entertainment of the bookworms. The guys who just want to spend the evening with a beer and a ball game have no choice but to contribute their taxes for high falutin books largely written by snobby people who look down upon them. Ain't that great?"
      
      Yes, bob, they are fair. As for the people who are left functionally illiterate, guess what? Public libraries do offer to help such people learn to read. Cost to those illiterates? Nothing. Funded by their own tax dollars. And really, "bookworms"? That's the only type of person who visits a library? Well, obviously I'm talking to a complete fool because that is as far from the truth as you can get. Students, teachers, children, adults, etc all visit libraries and benefit from them. They all don't go for entertainment, some go to do research, to study/learn, etc. Some go for the quiet atmosphere and not necessarily to check out books. People go to use the publicly paid for computers and internet service. Some to print and make copies or send/receive faxes. There is way more to libraries than you obviously know about.
      
      Guess what bob, I'm one of those guys who likes to kick back at night with a beer and a game. I'm also a guy who when he randomly has a day off from work on a rainy day likes to go sit in the library with his Nook Color and read in the quiet atmosphere. Ain't that great? I disprove everything you say with common sense and knowledge of the subject on which I am speaking about. Try it some time. It's marvelous.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Modplan (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      You brightened up my day, bob. Keep on trollin'.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      yes it is great, because we have to put up with the "jock" types giving us shit for being "book worms", the endless hours of "fun" they/you derive from trying to make us look like freaks because we know how to read a book and enjoy it should be payback enough for your support of something you dont use....
      
      btw, I didnt know all the people who like to drink beer and watch ball games where functionally illiterate...will have to tell my father and his other school teacher friends that...
      
      Also having grown up going to public schools, I can tell you, if your functionally illiterate when you are done/graduate, its your own damn fault, those who want to learn will, those who dont will blame others for their own choices...
      
      bah....stupid trolololol
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btrussell (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:57am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      "The guys who just want to spend the evening with a beer and a ball game have no choice but to contribute their taxes for high falutin books largely written by snobby people who look down upon them."
      
      So you have no problem supporting multi-million dollar contracts for some guy who can dribble?
      
      I like your ethics.
      
      And you expect people to obey laws written by snobby people, heading lobbying groups, who look down upon them?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:16pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Just who is innovating here?
      Incidentally, when I was taking an argumentative essay module in my university course we were tasked with (surprise, surprise!) going to the local library to sift for research papers. We were banned from citing purely Internet-based resources. I'm quite certain my lecturer then isn't alone in her motivations to make sure students have a more varied range of sources for research material.
      
      So that's your plan, eh, bob? You against kids finishing their homework? (But I suppose you would be against those darn kids. Wouldn't want to risk them being smarter than you.)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - LazDude2012 (profile), 2 Feb 2012 @ 11:45am
      
      Bob, let me stop you here.
      Libraries are some amazing things, Bob. At libraries, you can read any book you like. Some even have comfortable chairs. And you know, it's not like the guy with the beer and the game doesn't have books he enjoys. I promise you, everyone will have at least a few books they truly enjoy. Libraries are paid for out of the excess money from parks and recreational districts. So, if you want to rip off the libraries, that's a bad deal for your city's parks, rec centers, et cetera, as well. Have fun being a troll, Bob. Next time you want to read a book, I'll come take the necessary royalties out of your wallet.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unonymous (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:34am

"Generals are always prepared to fight the last war"
Big Content has always tried to throw up blocks and obstacles in the face of new tech or ways of doing business.

They are trying to control the �battle field� as it were.

If there is any doubt as to how well this works, ask the French how well the Maginot Line worked for them.

In the end the system will change, the only question is how much damage will be done in the meantime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:44am
  
  Re:
  Huh? Libraries have been around for hundreds of years. They're the ones who trying to defend an old business model with laws and tax collectors.
  
  The Kindle, the Nook and the other eReaders are the ones that are innovating. They want to move away from forced consumption and share costs evenly among those who consume things.
  
  But you're right that the system will change. There's no way that most states will be able to pay the huge pensions promised the librarians and the other state workers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:01am
    
    Re: Re:
    Huh? Libraries have been around for hundreds of years. They're the ones who trying to defend an old business model with laws and tax collectors.
    
    Apparently, in Bobland, the deal struck between the public and the creators is one where the creators get everything under the sun for ever and ever (+ 1 day) and the public gets less than nothing (and should be happy for getting that).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:06am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Nonsense. If the publishers don't create what the public wants, the public doesn't have to pay anything. Nada. That's Bobland. The creators only get rewarded when they deliver something the people want to buy.
      
      I have no idea how it works in your mind, but if you're like many of the entitled couch potatoes around here, you probably believe that the creators will work really hard and be really super cool about it when the folks on Reddit "taste" their copies. Then money will magically appear from somewhere to support the creators. But don't worry. The magic will happen because it's the internet and the internet is cool about making magic happen.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:10am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Funny. That's how I see many of the people around here. They think they have a god-given right to get books for free. Somehow they think that they'll continue to magicallly appear on the library shelves without paying for their creation costs.
        
        http://www.gutenberg.org/
        
        Here's a bunch of free books. And if copyright actually lasted a reasonable amount of time there would be even more free books!
        
        Free books! It's like a library! Free! Library! Knowledge! Free! Library!
        
        But that's bad, right?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Suja (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The magic will happen because it's the internet and the internet is cool about making magic happen.
        
        yes
        
        http://www.kickstarter.com/
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:22am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        See what I wrote about Kickstarter above. Basically it's asking people to buy a pig in a poke. Given that many writers don't finish books even when they get advances, it's a real gamble to rely upon Kickstarter to fund things.
        
        And while I agree that Kickstarter has been good occasionally, the vast majority remain unfunded. Plus the potential for fraud is huge.
        
        But get a clue. Kickstarter isn't new. It's called an IPO of stock and don't ask me why Kickstarter isn't regulated by the SEC.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 2:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        See what everyone replied to you about Kickstarter above.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 9:01am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Nonsense. If the publishers don't create what the public wants, the public doesn't have to pay anything. Nada. That's Bobland. The creators only get rewarded when they deliver something the people want to buy.
        
        You missed my point. Copyright is a bargain between the public and creators. Creators get a government enforced monopoly for a limited time on their works. The public is supposed to benefit from those works after that limited time is up. Copyright has been extended well beyond it's original length and the only offset the public has had is libraries. Now the creators (or their trade groups) want to limit that even more.
        
        When people like you wonder why there is so much infringement (ie: the public not living up to it's side of the deal) perhaps you should remember that your side isn't living up to the bargain either.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:01am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        well stated and insightful...good job Gwiz :)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 12:55pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Publishers don't create dick. Authors are the creative element, here, and aren't even a part of your equation. You're too worried about the publishers getting their monies.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:01am
    
    Re: Re:
    And yet all the legislators state and federal will manage to get theirs? We pay for that too.
    
    Creating artificial scarcity is a losing game. Digital files are the furthest thing from scarce.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:07am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No one is talking about creating artificial scarcity. Amazon will create as many Kindle copies of a book as people want. (And save trees by not printing worthless copies.)
      
      That's not scarcity.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:37am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        funny, most people I know who own ereaders admit that physical books have more value the ebooks, hence they wont pay the same price for an ebook....
        
        you cant legally resell an ebook....you can a physical book...
        
        oh wait your one of those idiots who thinks they need to outlaw reselling of anything because the publishers/manufacturers dont get a cut of the resale...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:12am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Actually, I think that ebooks are better than printed books. You can't do text search for any string in printed book. The index in the back is usually pretty limited.
        
        I think people should be free to choose whether they want to pay extra for the right to resell the book. The current text book marketplace isn't very fair to students because it forces them to tie up hundreds of dollars only to get some of it back at the end of the semester.
        
        If you think about it, a rented copy that can't be resold is a great deal if you don't want to tie up cash in ownership. It's just like a house or any other asset.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 9:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Whoosh. That's the sound of Amazon running out of an infinitly replicable amount of something.
        
        Similar to the sound of the empty swirling void where your business acuity should be, bob.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 7:51am

The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
Everyone around here complains about the lawsuits from the RIAA and the MPAA. Have they seen how local municipalities treat people who don't pay the taxes that support the libraries? They just move right in, kick people out of their house and put the house up for sale. It's brutal.

Remember that when you're lionizing those libraries. The reason they're able to be so kind and generous with those books is because rough men stand ready to seize the property of anyone who dares opt out of the system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:02am
  
  Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
  nothing new the riaa and mpaa have done that too and in worse cases they do it in places that are not in their care, so your point is?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:09am
    
    Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
    Really? How? It is rare for the courts to take away someone's house when they declare bankruptcy because of a court judgement. I'm sure no one expects mostof the folks who lost to the RIAA to actually pay all of the judgments.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 5:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
      For the RIAA, the poor financial state of whomever they're suing has never been an issue. They've even gone after a homeless person based on IP evidence.
      
      >I'm sure no one expects mostof the folks who lost to the RIAA to actually pay all of the judgments.
      
      By "lost to the RIAA", do you mean Jammie Thomas and Joel Tenebaum? Or are you trying to say that since the people who pay up never actually pay fines of $150,000 per song allegedly infringed, any amount lower than that is alright?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:05am
  
  Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
  Have they seen how local municipalities treat people who don't pay the taxes that support the libraries?
  
  I have no idea where you live, bob (nor do I care), but in my little corner of the world funding for libraries comes from millages which need to passed by the voting public to increase property taxes. Library millages rarely fail around here because the public wants the libraries.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:11am
    
    Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
    So 51% of the voters want the books. What about the other 49%? Face it. It's a tyranny of the majority.
    
    (And in most places, most people don't even vote and can't comprehend these millages on the ballot. It's really a tyranny by the people who can speak fancy words.)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:35am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
      So 51% of the voters want the books. What about the other 49%? Face it. It's a tyranny of the majority.
      
      Actually, I would call it a representative government.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:25am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        Actually, I checked with a bunch of people around here. No one around here even knows the term "millage". And everything to support the library comes from the general fund.
        
        And really, do you want to get into the argument about the representative government making everything okay? If so, you've got to accept SOPA if it's passed.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 11:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        Actually, I checked with a bunch of people around here. No one around here even knows the term "millage". And everything to support the library comes from the general fund.
        
        A millage tax is a property tax that is voted upon by the public based on a millage rate (amount of tax per thousand currency units of property value). The common terms used around here are "millage vote" or "millage renewal vote" when these come up at election time.
        
        It's the main way district libraries are funded in Michigan.
        
        Michigan District Library Law
        
        And really, do you want to get into the argument about the representative government making everything okay? If so, you've got to accept SOPA if it's passed.
        
        You're right - I don't want to get into an argument about that. But, I will say that local millage vote is about a billion times more representative than out-of-touch congressperson trying to push a bill through that the majority of the public doesn't support.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 11:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        I want to add that millage votes in Michigan are also how school districts and local governments receive additional funding above and beyond the general funds provided by the state or federal government for things like police and fire services and school operating expenses.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 1:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        I hate to say it, bob, but if none of those around you know anything about millages, then they known jack all about taxes, and you need to stop citing them. Just showing how very little you really do know.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AzureSky (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:43am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
      sorry, but thats bs, most people who dont vote dont do it because they are lazy SOB's who cant be bothered to check a few boxes and sign there name....
      
      I dont know about where you live, but here, ballots are written in simpler language then the news paper(news papers are enlarge written to a 6th grade reading level)
      
      and guess what, if you dont want to pay for other people to have books your more then welcome to move someplace without libraries, there are some places people live without such things even in this country....
      
      sounds more like you want to move to one of the librarian strongholds in africa tho....
      
      hell even Ron Paul hasnt suggested closing down public libraries...
      
      my suggestion is to move...if your not able to afford a ticket, alot of cargo ships will hire you on and let you work to pay your way...may be just the ticket for a non-couch potato like yourself!!!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 8:12am
    
    Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
    They just want a free ride to the free stuff using free freedom! How dare they? We have millionaire librarians flaunting all their wealth and power and the poor starving authors who just want some food to eat.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - bob, 13 Jan 2012 @ 10:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
      You joke about being millionaires, but that's how much their pensions are worth especially if you factor in the health care. They're very well taken care of, compared to the rest of society.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 1:04pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        Umm... [citation needed] because you are a damned fool if you believe this.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 1:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
        They live in mansions made of orphaned books and the bones of long dead authors!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 3:37pm
  
  Re: The RIAA and the MPAA have nothing on the local municipalties
  Ah, bob, so this is what you've been cooking up in your absence? Libraries are freetard utopias? What next, you going to include "Big Library" in your inane posts from now on?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 12:47pm

If libraries are ripping off publishers, wouldn't that make the Library of Congress equivalent to thepiratebay.org?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2012 @ 1:20pm

*sigh*
It's depressing that I should have to post this link, but it appears to be the way this is going:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MahaliaShere (profile), 13 Jan 2012 @ 2:32pm

I believe these major publishers really hate the fact that unsigned/independent writers are on the rise. Many of their ebooks are free and without DRM, no less. Oh, the horror!

Yes, they hate them and someone's got to be punished. Who else but libraries and their patrons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Melany, 16 Jan 2012 @ 9:08am

piracy
Not to mention the millions of dollars libraries have spent around the USA in puchasing their books. When citizens stop spending the libraries still keep up the orders so that the less fortunate can have access.

Have we propped up publishers without their regard to the real benefits to their businesses???

Maybe we should just all stop our orders for a month or two and see them flinch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- AzureSky (profile), 16 Jan 2012 @ 9:43am
  
  Re: piracy
  the problem is that they would blame libery's and piracy for the loss of sales rather then their shit sales model or their own actions, even if it was part of an official protest.
  
  gotta remember these are the same kinda people as those from the mafiaa who can never blame themselves....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]