Does Anyone Care About The Impact of eBooks For Free?

With the announcement that South Ayrshire libraries are now to offer a free downloadable "ebooks" service to their members 24 x 7 we ask again who is dealing with the question of free versus buy on the High Street? Do the publishers feel that being paid is enough and that its no different to physical books being sold to libraries? Do the bookstore believe that libraries are no threat to their livlyhood? Do authors feel that they will get adequately rewarded by library royalties and a shrinking PLR (public lending right)? Why is this debate being sweept under the carpet?

Memebers of the library can then be read or listened to ebooks a computer, mobile phone, ebook reader, MP3 player or be burned to CD. Up to four titles can be borrowed at once from the libraries' website and although the selection today is relatively small it is being provided by US digital aggregator Overdrive who only this week partnered with Internet Archive in the US. The ebooks on the library shelf cover adult, children, fiction and non-fiction titles and include authors such as Kathy Reichs, Roald Dahl, Sophie Kinsella, and Man Booker Prize winner Hilary Mantel and autobiographies by Barack Obama, Frankie Boyle, Peter Kay, Andy Murray and Sir Chris Hoy.

We believe the questions over the commercial models of digital libraries, inter library lending of digital books and control of US material needs to be fully and frankly aired.

Digital LibraryWorld Part 4: The Hodge Potch

Yesterday the UK government lawyers stated that they believe that public libraries would be legally able to charge for e-books that are downloaded remotely under a library service. This may be the legal position, but what about the moral or social position? More importantly should access to information and literary works be paid for twice. once by taxes and secondly by readers? Should a subsidised public service be allowed to compete unfairly with commercial services? Why should physical books be lent free and yet digital charged within the same service?

Margaret Hodge may have established the legal ground , but that doesn’t excuse her attempts to profit from the public library service as a political football. with little or no regard to the potential damage and the implications to the publishing and bookselling industry. Margaret Hodge will be in effect privatising the library service by the back door and opening the door so wide open to encourage even more radical and disjoined thinking. Today we face a real ‘Hodge Potch’ of ministerial action from a lame duck government and a personal in search for eye-catching headlines for votes in an election year.

It is important that we debate the commercial versus public service question and why one medium should be charged for whilst others aren’t for the same work?

If libraries are allowed to compete head to head with resellers, the fight will be created that never previously existed and it will be one that is both unfair and unjust. Public libraries occupy prime civic locations and will be given even greater preferences than the low rent that charity shops selling books enjoy today. Staff will be paid out of the public purse, the services and systems will be paid out of public purse, the content will be bought out of the public purse and the access will be paid for by the public. Even VAT will flow to the public coffers!

We then have the next Hodgism allowing libraries to sell downloads not rent them. In doing so they will compete unfairly head to head, not just with Amazon, but the very fabric of the booktrade and every bookstore.

Libraries have a role, a community place both in the physical and digital worlds. They need to go mobile and digital. They need to create a social layer of information access and service and not just be seen as a place housing books on shelves. They need to be creative and innovative. This should not be at the expense of the booktrade, publishing industry and authors livelihoods. What is the objective?

When we first saw the Barnes and Noble superstore in the90s, with their cavernous space, coffee shops, newspaper racks and casual retail space we immediately thought they were libraries. When the Espresso POD machines first appeared, we immediately thought what a great community hub libraries could give them ands the service and support they could give local bookstores. When we first saw music , audio and PC in libraries, we thought why not. However, what went wrong was that public libraries were starved of the true investment required to transform them, they struggled to modernise and what money was given was often at the expense of buying books. They were often lost with little direction and staff often found themselves torn between being civil servants, information officers and bookmen. There is a need to change, but change should be one that understands the publishing framework and interdependencies that exist today and not ignores them in blind idealism.

Today we must debate and understand the implications of ‘free to rent’ versus ‘buy to purchase’. If we tip the scales too far to one extreme, we could undermine the fabric of what we are trying to encourage – writing and reading. Today we musty agree how creativity is rewarded and although PLR offers a good safety net , expanding this without a further increase in real money, merely dilutes, and does not encourage and reward creativity.

We must now ask what the role of the library is and how we build it into the digital future in a balanced way that encourages creativity, writing, learning, reading and one that builds community and social harmony. The PLR funding and reward system has to be fully included within any change. We talk often about the public private initiatives and closer relationships and there is a real need to explore these in any change. We must avoid actions that can destroy one in order that we save the other.

If the bookstores were to disappear because of commercial competition, we as society will have played a part in it. If bookstores were to disappear because of governmental action, then we as society have ay best let idealism and at worst greed overcome years of establishing a social service. Creating a tax on reading is not what public libraries were established to do. Reading is reading and to condone charging for digital but retain it for physical books, makes little if no sense.

At a time that the government states that access to the internet and even broadband are become fundamental rights for 21st century citizens, to charge for to read digital books is morally wrong.

PLR in a Digital Age

The UK Government is reportedly looking to extend the Public Lending Rights (PLR) programme to include non-print publications such as digital books. The PLR programme compensates authors from a central fund for the potential retail loss of sales of their works. The fund isn’t endless and is capped and shared between registered authors but only applies to printed books.

It is clear that libraries have the opportunity in a digital world to become the community hubs for information, services and media. However, there are many questions still to be answered before this can be realised not least of which is their ability to fund their position within the digital landscape. Some would suggest that it is funding that will ultimately determine their role.

The UK Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) claim that in 2007/8 there were over 11 million loans of audio books and the figure is growing. The ebook is still finding its feet within the UK library but with the entrance of players such as Overdrive from the US and Gardners acquisition of Askews and Holt Jackson, it is now easy to see that digital has an even bigger opportunity than today. The issue of pay versus free and the library relationship with the High Street is still outstanding on price but it is clear that ebooks will be available from any and every library and will not take up any space, removes the question of overdue fines and could be loaned from any armchair.

The Digital Britain report, published earlier this year recommended looking at extending PLR and the DCMS is urging all parties to participate in a public consultation to discuss extending PLR. The consultation ends on 16 October. However, the question remains as to the whether the size of the pot increases or the funds just get spread thinner? It is hard to see how ebooks can be effectively covered whilst their pricing remains unstable and their market penetration is small. Why not reward an author on the work, irrespective of the format, after all a work is created once and rendered many times, so a book is a book, no matter how many times it is rendered into different formats.

National Digital Library Tickets?

The Bookseller today covers the UK shadow culture secretary Ed Vaizey thoughts on their , "Renaissance for Libraries". Much of what he says makes a great deal of sense but one line drew our breath. He is reported as saying that they would also bring in a national library card, allowing library users to borrow books from any library in the UK.

This would obviously throw up some interesting issues on physical books being borrowed and not returned and the whole issue of the cost and implications re recovery but that apart it also throws the libraries into potentially direct conflict with retail in the digital world. Here the stock is virtual, the registration central and the reality is that a user would be able to access anything without leaving their armchair or paying a penny for it.

We have asked before about this clear clash of business models that has always been there but is now becoming greater under the digital umbrella. Can libraries sell books on rental under their royal charter and if so what is the difference between a bookstore and what could become the UK’s largest chain? If they can’t sell and lend them as current, what is the incentive for any consumer to buy a download when they get it for free?

Importantly how are authors to be rewarded if the library digital lendings increase? Do they share a pot of money such as PLR which is capped, or do they get paid a real royalty per transaction?

There is nothing wrong with sorting out the library system which is not broken but in need of some attention and TLC but we must recognise the conflicts and other changes that need to be considered and in doing so ensure we develop the service and reward the creators. This is a glass half full with masses of new opportunities for all, but we don’t know what we don’t know and every move has an implication.