I think this conflict is mostly an illusion.

The situation is being tightly controlled by the publishers. Library eBooks have tight DRM controls involving time-outs and a very limited number of copies.

Whatever fees the publishers are charging are causing local libraries to strictly limit their back catalog of eBooks.

So in the end, they've artificially created a situation that's basically the same as what used to occur naturally :

1) If you want a new release, you're going on a waiting list.
2) If you want an older book, only the most popular books will be easily available in eBook format.
3) In either case, you'd better finish with it in 21 days.

In short, if you can afford to buy an ebook you probably will buy it to avoid the hassle, but if you can't afford it you'll probably get it from the library.

This is basically ideal for the publisher. They get money from everyone they can get money from, and everyone else can still contribute to the book's "buzz".

In Response to noahkai (#61926):

Noahkai Said :

I'm going for a small business course in the fall so I can open up my own bookstore in the future.

Suggestion : Make it also a coffee shop.

Make it so people can grab a coffee on their way to work, and a book on their way home

I keep my books as safe as possible and I hope to pass them on.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the paper in many of my books will be starting to crumble in a decade or two.
I have books only a couple of years old that are already starting to yellow as though they were printed on newsprint.
But maybe that's my own fault for buying paperbacks.

Just two quick points and then I'm out.

Publishers are a crap filter. They take the time to wade through reams and reams of crap to find authors that are actually worth reading. Tor, as an example, has an open submission policy. The turn around time with them is months. The volume of people submitting is so great that a team of dedicated editors have to spend a great deal of time just to find the handful of new authors that they choose to publish. So long as this is true, traditonal publishers have a competitive advantage over self-publishing.

Point the second: I don't know what is up with society's moral compass, but it is broken. People that would never, ever consider stealing from a brick and mortar store will gladly, PROUDLY go online to steal music, or a movie, or an eBook. In one forum I frequent, I heard content piracy compared to stealing the wallet out of a pimp's unlocked car. He came by it dishonestly, the arguement went, so it was OK to steal it from him. Over and over, I see this same Robin Hood logic about how relative wealth justifies theft. Well, this ain't Sherwood Forest and you ain't Robin Hood. You're a stinking, scummy, lowlife thief. Just because you're doing it from the comfort and privacy of your home doesn't make it right.

In Response to WeDo (#61908):

This is exactly why I would be willing to pay a little extra to get a digital download along with my print copy.

Digitization is not and never will be preservation.

In Response to macsnafu (#61914):

I think you have a good point about copyright laws and I would like to elaborate on that.

These laws were created to encourage the transmission of knowledge and literature by legally making sure that the authors and discoverers are compensated monetarily. According to the original intent of the law, without paying too much attention to the wording, educational institutions are exempt since having such institutions, mostly nonprofits, pay each time material changes hands greatly reduces the transmission of knowledge, defeating the purpose of the law.

These laws were developed hundreds of years ago. At that time period, books cost more to print than to write. An author could be fully compensated only from a small percentage of the sale price. Since books were scarce and expensive, it made sense to have a large group pay for a single copy then redistribute it. Such practice is still used today, along with the practice of reselling books when done with them.
With the invention of ebooks, the cost of "printing" is below the cost of authoring and moving a book always leaves a ghost copy behind, even when transmitting ownership. since this is the case, we may have to go back in time so that the authors of material are compensated with the first or second book sold to a library or school for all members to read, without individual ownership. True this would greatly increase the cost of the book, however it would still cost less the the equivalent hand-bound book of the 18th century.

In Response to Lauren_Ipsum (#61900):

I think you make good points. I use libraries heavily and right now the eportion is a royal pain. Given that they eventually work out the access and download problems, there will still be the problem of limited copies and "I want to be able to read it whenever I want". Both reason to buy the book instead of borrowing it. Borrowing an ebook from the library means I have it for 2 weeks and then I have to queue up for it again, even if I haven't finished the book. With a physical copy I can decide if I prefer to pay the fine and keep it longer or return it and wait again. Ebooks and audio files don't allow that choice. Once the borrow time is up, it's gone (or rather locked).

As for the death of traditional publishing, that's probably well on the way. If I have to pay the same price for an ebook and a physical book, I'll buy the physical book. Unfortunately our home library is full to overflowing, which is why I've started buying more ebooks. And I've found that there is actually a place for epublishers. At first I was tempted by all those cheap self-published books. I rapidly found that I gravitate toward a few specific epublishers for the quality control. I'm not talking about content quality control, I mean things a good proofreader will find... like spelling, punctuation, homophones (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophone). Not all epublishers are equal in that respect either. I think that's the role publishers will play in the future. They will select quality content and quality editors and proofreaders. It's sort of like how McDonalds dominated fast food for a while. It wasn't that it was great food, it was that it was consistent. In the bad ole days, you'd take a road trip and might find a great diner, but you also might find lots of lousy ones. So, you take the kids to McDonalds rather than risk cranky kids that wouldn't eat because they hated the food.

In Response to AndyL (#61928):

Oh I know that for a fact I'm going to have to add a coffee shop in order to keep people in there, or at least offer something that will help gravitate towards the books. Either I want Second Cup (I like second cup, they're better than Starbucks) or someone who is independent.

Well I do remember that the old books, and I mean really old, like back from 1930's and less, will fall apart due to their construction with glue and what not. Books today are made with different materials so they can last longer. Best thing to do is wrap them in plastic and suck out all the air with a vacuum, make them air tight, and store them in a room with a dehumidifier.

In Response to bbcrfrank (#61933):

can decide if I prefer to pay the fine and keep it longer or return it and wait again.

Sure, but isn't this called "Being a jerk to your fellow library patrons"?

If you've got a physical book, and you can't renew it, then it's because someone else is waiting for it. If you're intentionally keeping it longer than you were supposed to, that doesn't seem like neighborly behavior at all.

By the way, thanks for linking to the definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition) of a word (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word) we all learned in fifth grade. I appreciate it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm)

In Response to kellett (#61909):

But libraries would still have the obsolescence issue when those SD cards are no longer supported by current technology. And there will always be a segment of the population who can't afford current technology -- libraries are pledged to serve everyone, regardless of economic circumstances.

In Response to noahkai (#61934):

Somehow I feel like encasing books in vacuum sealed plastic defeats the purpose of having them, though I can't quite articulate why.

I guess, unless you're running an archive, I don't feel that there's value in owning books you can't read.

But at the same time, oxygen is destroying the cheap paper in my books.

I'm thinking about having the oxygen removed from my living room and just getting some of those drop-down masks like they have on airplanes.

I love my nook, but nothing beats reading your all-time favorite novels in your hands and the smell of that old paper.

In Response to pjarroues (#61907):

Hi, You can share e-books. I have a Nook and there is a nice sharing feature. Of course, it's only with people using the same format, but sharing is sharing,
Have fun!
Judy

If someone steals or I lose a book, no big deal. If someone steals or I lose an eReader, I'm SOL and a lotta dineri.

In Response to judyk (#61939):

JudyK Wrote - "Hi, You can share e-books. I have a Nook and there is a nice sharing feature. Of course, it's only with people using the same format, but sharing is sharing,"

No, Judy. The LendMe feature on the Nook is next to worthless. Publishers designate which books may be lent out. Of the 40 I own, only one is a LendMe title. If you have a LendMe title, that book can only be lent once in it's lifetime and only for two weeks.

In Response to AndyL (#61937):

Well you do that after you read the book, to keep it safe. Oxygen only destroys really bad books to my recollection, which is why I hate mass market paperback books as they are made out of crappy material.

Well you have fun with that then! :D

I take a Jeffersonian approach to ebooks. I torrent every book released by every author in every genre I like, which all go into my personal archive. If I open a book and like it enough to read it, I paypal the author five bucks and spread the word about him or her. No muss, no fuss, and everybody wins.

In Response to AndyL (#61935):

"Sure, but isn't this called "Being a jerk to your fellow library patrons"?"

Is it really being a jerk if I keep the book for 2 more days to finish it, rather than putting another hold on the book so when they can't finish it in 2 weeks they have to give it up put in a hold again? Have you ever tried to read the Game of Thrones in 2 weeks? I'll bet a lot of the people on that hold list are there because they couldn't finish it the first time around and trying to pick up where you left off after being in the hold queue for 2 months is impossible.

Secondly, when I was was in 5th grade they were call "homonyms" which has now been modified to include part of the meaning of "homograph". - yes even grammar evolves with time. And if you'd checked how knowledgeable the average high school student is about grammar, you might not have been so obnoxious, and perhaps you should have linked to irony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony) instead of sarcasm. Although you obviously did meant to be "bitter, or cutting".

In Response to forbiddenwar (#61905):

One week? Is that all the time your library gives you to read a book? Ours is three weeks, with the option to renew 8 times if no one else is on hold for it. Plenty of time to read a book.

I love my e-reader, I love to take it with me wherever I go, and read whatever I want when I want. I love the ease, convenience, and portability. I hate the cost, e-books cost so much less to distribute and manufacture, but cost nearly the same amount, sometimes more.

I love my paper copies, I love to see the physical representation sitting there on my shelf. I love having a bookshelf in ever room, and creeping down the hallway. I love to lend them to people, I love people asking about them, I love the feel of them in my hands. I hate that I own hundreds of books and I want them all on my e-reader but, can't.

I love being able to check e-books out from the library. I do not want to own every book I read, I like being able to preview, and because of this I buy far more than I would otherwise. I now hate checking paper copies out from my local library. If I am going to handle a paper copy I want to be one I own. From a business standpoint I can see why libraries have limited copies, and why there is a time limit. Publishers want us to buy, it is how they make money.

My problem is that I want both, but I am not about to pay double. (I propose that publishers do what some DVD manufactures have done, we pay a small bit more and get a digital copy included with the physical copy. It would make me so happy. So far no one has listened to me, but I will keep asking.) I have a list of a couple dozen books I want to buy, but can't decide what format to go with. So I am not buying them, I keep getting on the wait list and checking them out from my e-library.

Someone mentioned the possibility of authors doing as webcomic artists and running collateral advertising alongside their stories. I suddenly had this dreadful flash of my Kindle popping up a 60-second advertisement before I could read the next chapter.

I know I am a little late to the party, but having a friend who works in a library I thought there was something that should be pointed out about this discussion. Because of the digitizing of older books (only the most popular ones generally), and the overwhelming thought that comes to most people including some librarians: "Hey! EVERYTHING is on the internet somewhere!" many older books are getting the heave ho at libraries. One of of our libraries here has a history that dates back to the turn of the century and still has many older books. But because of the above logic more and more of those tomes of knowledge are being dumped and discarded. This library used to have a COMPLETE set of patent and copyright/trademark books from when they first started publishing in the late 1800's. Now, I don't know if you have had to do a patent or trademark search, but it costs a LOT of money to hire someone to do it even in the patent trademark office, or library of congress: yes, that is right it is NOT a free government service. Very few places have complete issues, and from what I have heard even the trademark office is lacking a complete set. Because these volumes did not appear to be used much and took up an entire wall they were all recently dumped. Here is the kicker: because they are technically government documents they cannot be sold, they have to be destroyed. Yes, burned, shredded, or even recycled, but DESTROYED. Look up some trademarks online on the official government site, and they are such horrible scans that you can hardly even read some of the wording on the logos, and that is their "official" preservation of the original document. For digitizing in institutions it is about quantity not quality, so they are generally low res and very quickly scanned sometimes even cutting off portions. I asked the library why they got rid of these volumes and their reply was "nobody used them, and it's all available online anyways". Nobody used them because they were on a second floor small walk up vestibule that looked like you were not allowed up there, and there was absolutely no signage telling what this mammoth wall of books was. And it is continuing to happen increasingly with the older collections as we speak. All because of the prevalence of digital, people think it is already available, when in reality the original in the library may be one of the few repositories left in the world. Needless to say, both I and my library friend cried when all that free knowledge was lost. Just one small chapter in one of those books (they were bound magazines) goes for anywhere from $30 to $100 apiece IF you can find them. I am alarmed at the thought of all the knowledge we are losing daily with our dependence on digital, not to mention what HAS been digitized; how archival the material being used is. Things that printed in books may have been around for several hundred years, in digital form we are going to be lucky if they are around for half of that.

In Response to gbbloom (#61903):

According to their FAQ page they only pay advance Payments to established authors, according to Wikipedia they own their own film studio, so that's pretty cool if you get published and your book makes it to the big screen.Click here to procure more information [forexdice.com]

In Response to hypnotosov (#61902):

According to their FAQ page they only pay advance Payments to established authors, according to Wikipedia they own their own film studio, so that's pretty cool if you get published and your book makes it to the big screen.
check out your url [beecodes.com]