Firefly in the Sky

pewinternet:

For our next report studying the changing role of public libraries in the digital age, we’re supplementing our usual nationally representative phone surveys with online surveys to draw out the deeper, richer stories behind the data. If you check out or download e-books from your local public library, please take the survey and tell us about your experiences!

http://libraries.pewinternet.org/participate/survey/e-book-borrowers

Cool! Just participated.

latimes:

If state education cuts are drastic, the librarians’ only chance of keeping a paycheck is to prove they’re qualified to be switched to classroom teaching. So LAUSD attorneys grill them.

This is such bullshit. Utter, utter bullshit. Libraries are SO important, I just can’t fathom growing up without one (well, more then one, counting school and public libraries).

(Source: Los Angeles Times)

I picked up some of those horribly abused books and felt like I was putting my hands on tangible populism. Those books are there because they’re read, and it actually made kind of a good reminder that the library was trying to help, that the idea was to serve readers. Whether you like genre fiction or not, the people who read it read books and support libraries and bookstores, and the proof is right there in all those spines that are half-unreadable because they’re creased in so many places.

[…]

They had magazines, they did have encyclopedias and research materials, obviously, and basically, if you have a small child, they will do everything short of holding your kid by his feet and dipping him in fonts of wisdom. There’s story time, there are tutoring rooms (which were in use when I was there), there’s a book club (they’re reading As I Lay Dying at the moment), and OH RIGHT, it’s staffed with people who clearly would really like it if you came up and asked them questions about books or anything else.

Loved this article!  (Emphasis mine - I cracked up at that line.)

bibliofeminista:

In borrowing terms, e-books have been treated much like print books. They are typically available to one user at a time, often for a seven- or 14-day period. But unlike print books, library users don’t have to show up at the library to pick them up — e-books can be downloaded from home, onto mobile devices, personal computers and e-readers, including Nooks, Sony Readers, laptops and smartphones. (Library e-books cannot be read on Amazon’s Kindle e-reader.) After the designated checkout period, the e-book automatically expires from the borrower’s account.

The ease with which e-books can be borrowed from libraries — potentially turning e-book buyers into e-book borrowers — makes some publishers uncomfortable. Simon & Schuster and Macmillan, two of the largest trade publishers in the United States, do not make their e-books available to libraries at all.

“We are working diligently to try to find terms that satisfy the needs of the libraries and protect the value of our intellectual property,” John Sargent, the chief executive of Macmillan, said in an e-mail. “When we determine those terms, we will sell e-books to libraries. At present we do not.”

Publishers are nervous that e-book borrowing in libraries will cannibalize e-book retail sales. They also lose out on revenue realized as libraries replace tattered print books or supplement hardcover editions with paperbacks, a common practice. Sales to libraries can account for 7 to 9 percent of a publisher’s overall revenue, two major publishers said.

But e-books have downsides for libraries, too. Many libraries dispose of their unread books through used-book sales, a source of revenue that unread e-books can’t provide.

The American Library Association has assembled two task forces to study the issue.

I’m excited that the NYT is finally covering this publisher-library debate over e-books that was most recently sparked by HarperCollins’ controversial decision to only allow 26 checkouts for their e-books at libraries before requiring libraries to “rebuy” the e-book. I linked to an angry video response from librarians to this new rule a few days ago, but I can definitely see both sides… if I had an e-reader, I would definitely use this service primarily, rather than purchasing e-books. In fact, I’d probably only buy print editions of books instead…and likely half of those would be used books so the publisher would not see much, if any, return on sales from my bibliophilia.

But at the same time, a 26 checkout limit for a library book is absurd. Think back to the days when libraries still stamped books at checkout… remember how many stamps were on any given book? I can bet more than 26. Maybe there can be a compromise at say, 50 or 100? But the library would still be shouldering that cost, and the publisher would still be losing out on sales.

Should libraries not carry e-books then? But they’re one of the most popular checkout options lately, and libraries need all the help they can get.

See, this is definitely a complex issue and most certainly a conversation that must be had by both libraries and publishers. I, for one, am grateful that HarperCollins sparked this controversy. It’s about time we started talking about it openly.

(Also, interesting how the Kindle doesn’t allow for library e-book checkouts, no?)

Will be interesting to see where this goes. Currently I don’t have an e-reader, nor am planning to get one anytime soon (unless Amazon gives out free readers to Prime members!). But I do read free ebooks on my iPhone occasionally. It’s a major PITA though, and I do prefer actual books. Also, I LOVE the library.

infoneer-pulse:

Amazon is NOT selling Kindles so that people can then read free library books on them.

In fact, you could argue that people who really, really want support for library books are precisely the people Amazon doesn’t want buying the Kindle – they don’t buy as many books, they expect free and cheap, they are library customers before they are Amazon customers.

You could extrapolate and say that they will be less likely to buy other things from Amazon, and that if Amazon were to later turn the Kindle into a channel that sells everything, these library book lovers would be far less interested.

Amazon is doing what’s good for it as a business by not supporting library books. It is screening for good intent - customers’ intent to buy books and products from Amazon at reasonable prices.

» via Kindle Review

Disagree.  I’d only buy a Kindle if it had a library system, as mentioned above, but I buy a shitload of stuff on Amazon (not books but other stuff, including music - okay, well, the occasional book).  So I’m not “cheap.”  Of course, I’m a sample of one.

azspot:

Hot on the heels of the story in Publisher’s Weekly that “publishers could be losing out on as much $3 billion to online book piracy” comes a sudden realization of a much larger threat to the viability of the book industry. Apparently, over 2 billion books were “loaned” last year by a cabal of organizations found in nearly every American city and town. Using the same advanced projective mathematics used in the study cited by Publishers Weekly, Go To Hellman has computed that publishers could be losing sales opportunities totaling over $100 Billion per year, losses which extend back to at least the year 2000. These lost sales dwarf the online piracy reported yesterday, and indeed, even the global book publishing business itself.

From what we’ve been able to piece together, the book “lending” takes place in “libraries”. On entering one of these dens, patrons may view a dazzling array of books, periodicals, even CDs and DVDs, all available to anyone willing to disclose valuable personal information in exchange for a “card”. But there is an ominous silence pervading these ersatz sanctuaries, enforced by the stern demeanor of staff and the glares of other patrons. Although there’s no admission charge and it doesn’t cost anything to borrow a book, there’s always the threat of an onerous overdue bill for the hapless borrower who forgets to continue the cycle of not paying for copyrighted material.

This is great.