ebook piracy and the future of the professional writer

Many artists are already doing this. Remember when Nine Inch Nails put their album online for free and I think gave a link so people could simply donate what they felt it was worth? They ended up making more on average than they would have from regular sales, and more of that share directly. (if I recall, been a few years and don't feel like playing google-fu).

These days, I could see a successful model for a writer that is similar. Give the work for free, and what you get is exposure (the sort of thing short story writers are accustomed to!). Then, in the e-book, provide links to blogs and websites. Monotize the blog, have the website offer products and services. Drive up traffic, which these days is a verifiable, valid way to prove fans and interest, which increases the writers appeal for different reading series or speaking at conferences or doing private workshops. Also, such exposure is pretty big when trying to get writing-related jobs like teaching or editing journals (used to be based on sales, but these days sales aren't the only story anymore). On the website offer merchandise, or even special print copies, whether hardback or signed or with bonus material not in the e-format (sure, people can try to scan and bootleg it, but will be poorer quality, etc).

So, sure, suddenly you aren't making direct profits from book sales, but how many more people are now becoming interested and familiar with your work, and thus you, which drives up interest and other opportunities. Oh no, you can't say you've sold a certain number of copies, but can still track traffic and it may actually drive up print copies anyhow, as has generally been discussed in that many people just like having actual books, as well as more expensive versions of books.

One of the most genius things I've heard is a writer selling expensive, limited edition hardcover books signed and all, and then also providing a USB with an e-copy of the book.

There are changing philosophies, as there are with any industry, and those who don't adapt perish. Those who are standing around complaining things are changing or looking at the sky waiting for it to fall are by definition not adapting...

 

Few problems
A. look at a lot of sites, sure they get donations and quite a lot if they are big enough but thats just it, they have to be big enough, and even then whats to stop form someone form not paying?
look at samples in stores
when i was a kid it seemed like everyone bought them after tasting them but now?
you be surprised at how many don't
All in all the idea would not work as odds are 80% of writers would not make even on the sales

IMO stealing will never be right, this is stealing and if we have not adapted in millions of years i don't think we will now
The way we will adapt is put up more protection sure you cant get rid of it
but thats the same with all crime, the bad guys find away around we find a way to stop them
sure the fight will never end but thats ok the point is that we wont give in to something wrong just because its easy to
the only thing to do with crime is fight it, cause if you give in once then you give in again and again and again

 

@BrightShadow

Um, read the study and do the math. Maybe you'll figure out what I'm saying. The thieves already stole it. Their interest may or may not contribute to sales for that artist. What the artist gets is the buzz generated by thieves who like their work.

This is assuming that internet pirates are a circle of poor people who only ever steal and never communicate with the outside world. Studies would seem to indicate that's not the case.

The way it helps poor people is by helping the artists who are poor. It gives them more exposure. I know -- this goes against everything the industry says. But that's because they want to protect their jobs. Piracy means more exposure for the bottom 75% of artists. I'm not defending the morality of it. I'm just stating a fact. That's what it does. So it doesn't make a lot of sense to get in a big huff about it unless you're in the top 25%, and even then you have options at your disposal to get that new yacht.

Exactly -- so why waste resources on anti-piracy when you could be investing that money into developing a better way of doing business?

You seem to see only two viable models of publishing: self-publishing and big publishing houses. There are new models emerging. I think the future will favour small press -- that's just my opinion though. It remains to be seen.

Uh . . . when did I say that? I think you're ignoring like 90% of what I say here. I'm saying that won't disappear because of the thieves.

This I agree with, in a limited sense. I think as publishing houses get leaner, this is the aspect that will keep them alive.

The thing about bittorrent is it's basically unstoppable. If one site goes down another pops up. Even if you get all the sites, people can get ahold of torrents. It's very powerful technology. This crackdown you propose would be futile. It would cost oodles of money and in the end it wouldn't help anybody. Also there's no reason to in the first place. Internet piracy is doing about as much damage as bread-stealing. Go after the corporate criminals and mobsters. Yeesh.

@The-Joker

Most people will take something if it's available for free, yes. As for the extent to which INTERNET piracy impacts sales, it would appear that this is significantly lower than RIAA and other big players in the entertainment biz would have you believe. The numbers are in, and they're the weakest link. They just don't want you to know that. Even without piracy in the equation, this is still the case.

The merits of piracy are incidental and freakishly unexpected. However, therein lies the way of the future. The future of marketing is going to be massively impacted by these studies.

If you have any stats or arguments to back this up, I'd be interested in knowing what they are. I'm just guessing what will happen to books based on what happened to music. Kindles and the like seem to do for books what MP3s did for CDs. It would seem that bands who weren't promoted as much benefited substantially from the added exposure that internet piracy gave them. You might be right -- it remains to be seen. It's a fair point that books are different from music, but I would guess a similar pattern will emerge in the market. If the book is more accessible then it will generate more buzz and sell more. Simple math, really.

I'm not saying it's okay to steal. I'm just saying all the fuss about it isn't really necessary. It's counterproductive, in fact.

 

I think the potential of this kind of marketing goes way further than anyone realizes, and if people could wrap their heads around the huge potential that social media creates they would stop whining about piracy.

 

No offense, but your examples are so limited, black-and-white and anecdotal I'm having a hard time seeing the point in discussing them.

First, you're comparing sneaking into a movie with pirating an actual copy of a product, and now you're trying to make some point based on free samples in stores where you somehow have research and data to back up your assertions (or wait, are just seeming to?).

Think about this, if free samples weren't a valid means of advertising/marketing, then why is that one of the most basic forms of it that has existed probably since the dawn of any sort of product exchange. You're using it as an example to show how writers would then go out of business, yet meanwhile free samples of cheese and meat isn't putting Hickory Farms out of business (perhaps they are, but not because of free samples, I can assure you).

It's easy and simplistic to think 'well, I never bought the sausage, I just ate free samples, so surely nobody else will buy the sausage, much less the cheese that isn't nearly as delicious and can be smelled from halfway across the mall!' Ummm, yes, nice personal anecdote, but if free samples weren't actually shown to increase interest and sales inside a Hickory Farms, dontcha think they'd have caught on long before one guy on an internet forum exposed it as faulty marketing?

I think we all agree that stealing isn't right, despite the shades of gray. I'm not sure why people keep arguing that stealing isn't right. Yeah, it's not, but that point isn't going to stop anyone from doing it. The smart artists adapt. The obsolete artists stand around complaining that it's just not fair, and back in my day, and why aren't the police doing something about curbing the thing the smart artists realize probably not only can't be curbed, but CAN be used to benefit them.

And all the one-sided, black-and-white demonizing of demonic e-book pirates is all really silly. First off, the fear that everyone is doing it is ridiculous. Most people are simply NOT online downloading an artist's product, whether books, movies or albums. Hell, half the people I know (yes, anecdotal) have the capabilities, but don't bother. Why? Because there isn't some evil lurking in the heart of pirates that force them to steal everything like it's some bad 50s movie where refer causes madness and chaos in the streets!

And we're talking about BOOKS! Maybe I'm just one of those 'lame' artsy types, but do you all really think there's widespread problems with them darn kids these days stealing BOOKS!? If it were even true, would it be a problem anyhow? Hell, if I found out my nephew or friends were illegally downloading and gasp READING books, I'd throw a frickin' party.

But, I guess you all have a point... I mean look at the film and music industry. It's in RUINS! The next thing we know the streets will be filled with hordes of evil, black-hearted thieves who've stolen all our books and dared to READ them! AAAaahhhhhHHHHH, it'll be madness in the streets! MADNESS!

I still wonder if people are actually worried about e-book piracy, or just worried they'll have to adapt and actually DO something like be proactive and learn new, innovative ways to market themselves and succeed as a writer, not just as a seller of books. I don't mind, I mean, as I realize being a writer these days offers TONS of opportunities never before seen to make a living, and is thankfully about a lot more than just selling books.

 

I know this was to other pepole but basically this is the same old argument ina billions of forums so I'm basically just posting the same thign over and over

Exspalin?

whats to stop the next person form pirating? and the next person?
i don't know about you but pepole often ask three qurestiosn
"Where did you get it"
"How much did you pay"
"is it worth it"
obvusily if its free the awnser is yes

so once again your "study" are flawed as the assume the next person will pay for it

who cares about expsosure if you dont get paid for it?
sure you can get paid by book signing but to get those you almost have to be in the top 25%
you just made a parodx

because giving stuff away for free is not a better way of doing business and just becuse something is more eazy dose not mean its the right way to go

And how in any way will that help at all?

Thats like saying that since someone stole a Tv but someone else killed the first person should be let go
thats dumb, and holds no logic what so ever
If we did that how many pepole would be doing it cause they know they could get away with it?

you keep saying "the numbbers" but how many pepole have come up with "cold hard numbers"
to proof the end of the world, that america is satin, that evils is alive ect
and even so i have yet to seen a believable study and all fo you are saying
"the numbers so it the record componys are liying!!!!"
but whats to stop the person who is obusily in favor of pirating form liying?

Uh huh I dont think so many "studys" have been done to "prove" things like this
never work

No becuse as you said pepole will take free if offered and pirates is free

simple logic really

How so?
giving in? letting them do it legally? then what happens when evrey dose it cause the few who did not do it cause it was agisnt the law?
Your way is far more counterproductive
As.
A. that means there is no punishment for it as such more pepole will do it
B. no crime in the world can be stoped dose that mean we should stop cause they are counterproducti

 

I like how you mettion one of my flaws about the movies but say nothing about
the tv, guitar, game, laptoop ect
nice dodge
I also like how I am not backing up my stuff you say but you have not either

Did i Ever say they where vaild?
as for my proof I've worked 4 defreint stores in places like
Dallas, San Antonio and two small towns

working samples and talking with those who do samples
and bosses
Samples whil turning a profit SOMETIMES dont always
mainly if its not named brand

Also remeber samples are about 1\4th of one peice of a part of the whole set
so you get a small bit

so it takes abot 12 pepole to get even one whole pice of meat
we cant do that with books

Or maybe you can stop asumming that I don't know what I'm talking about as I've said above

So drugs will never stop should we stop fighting that?
neither will killing or any other cirme
we stop crime not becuse its easy but becuse its the right thing to do

But it keeps getting worse and worse
more pepole are downloading evrey day, how can i prove this?
look at the priat web sites they get unbelivbaly high vists

So if they stole form the library you would throw the party?
or at lest in till the cops come?
so is it defreint when they cant get caught?

No body here has say it is madness dont put words in to our mouths
and its not the point how well the compony is doing
just becuse they are doing very well is not an excusse to steal form them

What about the pairtye who dont want to pay anywhere form
1-30$?
that seems a lto worse
Also why learn new ways around something illegal?
Yes it is a lot more
but how would you like it if you did not get paid for your work?
deferent then huh?

 

No offense wolfi, but maybe you should inform yourself about the issues a little bit more before jumping into the fray. Or at least look back over the arguments being made.

I posted a page of studies on the music industry and the impact of illegal file sharing. Two things were discovered based on rigorous statistical studies:

(1) File sharing is only responsible for less than 30% of the decline in sales in the record industry. That's not a 30% decline -- that's 30% OF the decline. Sales are going down anyway and it's not just pirating. It's the new technology.
(2) File sharing actually benefits the bottom 75% of artists by offering them more exposure. The top 25% however do see a significant decrease.

Internet piracy is unethical, sure, but these studies suggest that the standard reasons given for this as well as the implied magnitude are false. There may be a way to go with the grain on this, and turn it to the artist's advantage.

It's not my study and it doesn't assume anything. It's just the way it works. It's still the way it works even if the hypothesis that thieving is like a spreading virus is correct -- which I don't buy.

Huh??? I feel like we already went over all this. The whole book signing angle is pretty irrelevant.

Cut out the middle man.

What's stopping anyone from lying? I dunno man. Look at the studies. They're pretty solid. I posted them earlier in the thread. The 75/25 one was done by a Harvard PhD student.

Well there's no punishment for it now anyway. People get away with pirating left right and centre. Doesn't mean it's right. The fact is it's not the plague everyone says it is. And if people would pay attention they'd realize if you think outside the box this means opportunity.

 

Interesting you should bring that up -- yes, actually. We should. There's a good argument that a "war on drugs" does nothing to stop drug abuse. What helps is fixing the social conditions that lead to drug use and offering rehabilitation. That's a whole other conversation though.

Yeah but piracy isn't killing. It's like spitting on the sidewalk at worst. Invest your efforts in a nobler cause.

 

Just read this post and you will change your mind

this so called "study" is flawed
first off it realy has no way for any one to check the work

2nd if you read this you can see a lot of things that really make this "study" fklawd first off

Zentner (2003)

So his thing was "guessed"
Dont count and we have no real number yet


Oberholzer and Strumpf (2004)

In other words when they did this "study" they did have a few problems
they "assumed" that most of the decline was becuse of vido games and wehat not but have no way to back it up

I could keep on going but all in all these things assume to much to make a "cold hard fact"
there is no proof that becuse we buy a game we dont bbuy and aubulm

this PROOFS you did not read this as the article it self even says they assume

And as i posted it assumes way to much

alaso his

you keep on saying so but trust me there are lots of pepole who "rely" on others good will and fall bbank rupt and even homeless

While sure most writers have a 2nd job
the fact remains that what yout susgetsin means they only get paid what others feel they deserve
which means they wont get paid for evrey book made
which means to make even they ahve to RASIE the price

 

Heh, no, that's not how it usually works. No reputable business model includes simply raising the price when demand lowers.

 

You miss the point

okay it cost X amount of cash to make a book
they need to make a certia amount of sales to pass it

if pepole are getting free ones and they decide how much to pay then it will not work

Componys raise prices to make even

if gas gets hardar to buy then prices go up so they can make even or more so
bascily busnies
cause its not the bad sells its how much the sells go for

 

If free goods are effecting your bottom line, you don't raise the prices on existing customers to break even. You either raise the quality to make your goods more desirable, or you find a way to compete at lower costs to make it worthwhile for your customers to return to purchasing the legal, legit version of your product or services.

Raising the prices further just alienates your customers even more and justifies (in their minds) going elsewhere for the goods or services.

Even better is to offer SOME goods and services at a reduce, get-them-in-the-door rate, and then have other goods/services with higher profit margins. This is arguably what offering free copies of a book is doing. They're interested in the free book, and stay for the other goods/services the writer has to offer.

The problem seems to me more than some writers feel entitled, and seem to deem it beneath them to do anything but write... as if that's been the way writing has ever worked.

 

Uh and what do you say they should do?
make a painting to?
so know you have to be a writer and a painter?

like what?
its hard enough to write a book they should not have to tap dance to entertain

should a fireman have to tap dance to earn his pay?
should a Builder have to sing to earn his pay?
they are WRITERS not anything eles
they work to write, they want to publish their books
they dont want to have to tap dance, make a painting or a vido game to acompony it
and they should not have to
not becuse its beanth them but becuse the book it self is enough for payment
So what else can they offer?
not the big time writers who get asked to be in the book work chops and what not
what else can a writer offer?

Your acting like any writer can make 15 other things
not evrey one is like that


And most writers (not counting big time writers)
have a day job that is their ONLY source of income
your acting like well a writer can draw the guys in the book then mold them and it will be fair to take something for free...

 

There are plenty of examples that have already been given in the thread.

Sheesh, fool me once...

 

your "examples" are not good what so ever
make ANOTHER full book?
well in that case you have to make a lot of books before it really gets useful
and even then is it worth it? to spend at least 6 years?
(I've been told the average wait is 3 years for one book but you can use what ever numbber you want)

short story's? last i check short story's are not big even if free
Take out bits of the book for someone to read for free? we already do that, it don't stop piracy never will

as for other things
small time writers do not get asked to be in work shops really

Any others you listed in here have so many flaws its not even funny



sooooo your point is?
MY point is a WRITER is a writer they should not have to change the way things work just because people don't mind breaking the law since they know they cant get caught

I cant wait for a time when they can get caught
will that ever happen? doubtful but hey we can hope

 

So, you're a writer, too entitled to dare be expected to do anything other than what you, personally (despite it not actually being reality) expect to do as a writer, and can't be expected to change to meet the realities of a market, despite acknowledging you're waiting for a time when something you doubt will happened will let you do what you think a writer should do.

Ummm, good luck with that.

I don't want you to think I'm just ignoring you (I want you to be plainly aware of the fact), but I won't be responding any further to your replies as you haven't demonstrated the basic ability or willingness to actually read the very thread that have answered your questions and it's getting harder and harder not to assume you're just personally trolling for kicks and intentionally wasting the time of others.

 

Okay first writing is a hobby and a "2nd job" if you will
i excerpt someone to have a day job if they are a writer unless they are big time
but at the same time i do not belive if you are soemthing
E.x a dance teacher or something on the side
you should have to do other things to earn the money

Also your atack on writers its not wanted nor welcome none of us have said we are to "high" to work
I work on farms for my day job i get down and dirty
but I should not have to give something away for free just because it "boosts sells" on my other stuff

I'm never going to be a "master writer"
I Expect one series published before i die
thats all
what you are saying is writers write a book for free
and then have them buy something eels


I don't want you to think I'm just ignoring you (I want you to be plainly aware of the fact), but I won't be responding any further to your replies

#1 i disproved your "study" as they all even say they assume things that are drastically affect the out come
So no answers there

#2 your so called "writers feel like they don't have to do anything else" thing holds no value as almost evrey one here
either
A. has a job
B. is a young teen


You keep posting about this "better way of doing business"
yet
#1 giving away your main thing for free is NEVER good for business
#2 A writers business is to write books not mold things or what not , not becuse we are so "much higher" but i don't believe someone has to pick up yet another hobby or work TWICE as hard (to make more books for them to pay for)
to earn the proft of One book
Your basically saying a writer should do 2 books for the price of one



I get what your saying but I'm telling you form what I've seen there is no way these will work and even by logic it is NOT better way

 

Wolfi, Obviously I wouldn't post something if I hadn't read it. What I said about assumptions was in reference to your comment about the study assuming that "the next person would buy it." Besides which, the biases noted in the Blackburn study are statistical biases, not biases in the form of assumptions about consumer behaviour. Even taking into account the statistical biases the study suggests that RIAA wasn't being upfront about the way the market was being impacted by file sharing. The impact on sales is highly related to popularity. This much isn't even in dispute any more.

The Zentner study is a different matter but I still think it's interesting. You're right he does make some assumptions though. The other one you mentioned, I didn't even refer to. Besides which, all of those things that you cut and paste were in the article that I posted. The biases are presented for the reader to make his own assessments.

You're not addressing the fundamental arguments -- first off that many artists actually benefit from file sharing. Second off that there are other factors besides downloading that contribute to loss in sales for the entertainment industry in general. The exact numbers aren't the point. The point is that the impact on day-to-day life isn't as atrocious as it's often made out to be. It's spitting on the sidewalk, not murder.

Even if all this weren't true, there still remains the fact that Bittorrent is essentially unstoppable. Morpheus and Kazaa and Napster all have nothing on Bittorrent. The "bad guys" already won if you insist on arguing for the righteousness of the anti-piracy dogma. There's nothing to do about it besides figure out a new way of operating. If the industry goes up against Bittorrent, it's just going to lose. The only way to stop it would involve heavy regulation on internet usage, and the costs to society would outweigh the benefits. It makes much more sense for the industry to adapt to new technologies and use them to its advantage. The potential advantages are enough to make these stupid debates about piracy disappear for good.

You seem to think that piracy is going to ruin the financial prospects of writers. I've given many reasons for you to reconsider that point of view. Unless you have anything new to contribute, I don't see this going anywhere.

 

I almost completely agree with everything you just said. Almost because there is a certain segment of the population who downloads things illegally that do have a conscious about it.

I have downloaded three ebooks for free that I would NEVER have paid for: "God is not Great" by Christopher Hitchens, a man who I hate and would never give a dime of my money (but I was interested in just how lame his book was) "The Turner Diaries", which is a racist book of propaganda that has been called the American Mien Kempf, but I wanted to see what it was about none the less, and "Twilight"...just wanted to know if it really sucked that bad, and it does.

BUT, I would never pirate something I would have the slightest possibility of enjoying, or reading in full. I hate ereaders and only read paperbacks, so any ebook purchase would make no sense to me.

However, I am in the minority of people who have ever downloaded a book.

I think the only thing that can happen is to go after the guys who run pirate sites. You only have to arrest ten percent of them to make a chilling effect that will stop piracy in its tracks. If only the governments of the world would grow a pair.

 

A buzz amongst who? People might say it's great on a pirate site, so then more people will pirate it. Great....

No, these people will brag about the new book they read and tell their friends were they downloaded it for free, and hence they too will download it for free. Again, IF YOU OWN A KINDLE, A COMPUTER AND HAVE HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS, AND YOU PIRATE, YOU ARE NOT POOR, JUST CHEAP!

Who wants exposure if you're not getting paid?

You are under the false impression that they actually have to be shut down. Just like LEAs go after child porn sites and make a big show out of giving people serious jail time for it, they should go after people who run illegal piracy sites. LEAs know GOOD AND WELL that they can't catch every child pornographer on the net, so they instead go after a few and use their prosecution to scare the rest into thinking twice.

Keep in mind that in CP, these guys are making a killing. There is incentive to run a CP site and charge people big bucks for a commodity they can't get elsewhere, and yet after years of government crackdowns the number CP sites are down.

Now, look at pirate sites. Where is the incentive to run one? Not to make money, but to look cool for all your loser friends. If someone saw people getting five years in jail for running a piracy site you can guarantee they would pee themselves and take their own site down.

Oh, and people who run pirate sites are on par with gangsters as far as I'm concern, if not below. At least gangsters tend to have some style, unlike the 90lb loser living in his mother's basement eating pizza and downloading someone's hard work onto his pirate site in between rounds of World of Warcraft.

Trust me, those kinds of people scare easy. The thought of there cyber-geek rumps being thrown in a cell with Big Bubba will put the fear of God in them faster than you can say "HE DROPPED THE SOAP!" If there were clearly consequences for running a pirate site, pirate sites would be much less numerous in number.

 

I think you've misunderstood a lot of what I'm saying, BrightShadow. The point is that many artists DO make more profits as a result of file sharing. They ARE getting paid. MORE. The exposure they get from it is not useless exposure -- it's as good as radio play or having a music video or having your song on Grooveshark. That's assuming you need the exposure. If you already have it, then yes, it does take a dent out of your profits.

I don't know how many times I have to make this same point before the anti-piracy crowd understands what I'm saying. It's pretty straight-forward logic and there's plenty of evidence to back it up.

I'm not trying to morally excuse theft. I'm just saying you have your facts wrong. The magnitude of this is nowhere near what you're claiming. The fact that you're suggesting the same measures that have been applied to kiddie porn should be applied to file sharing in general should make that abundantly clear to anyone besides yourself.

And it seems you don't have a very good idea of how Bittorrent works. You're not talking about policing for just one (rather repugnant and easily identifiable) form of media. You're talking about cracking down on ALL copyrighted materials being transferred illegally as torrents. I'd love to hear how this crackdown would occur without infringing upon anyone's basic rights and freedoms. Also what would happen after ALL the torrent sites out there stopped hosting copyrighted materials or got shut down? Would piracy stop, or would more of these imaginary pizza-eating basement-dwelling dweebs pop up and use their computer skills to help the forces of evil?

Also note that finding books and songs online is relatively easy if you know how to use google's more advanced features. You don't even need to use torrents. This is because for the most part the industry is catching on that policing this stuff is a waste of time, and they're focusing their efforts on what they think they can control and is worth controlling. Even the industry is way ahead of you on this. Has been for years.

I dunno. I mean -- if you want to address any of my arguments that's one thing. But if you're going to persist with this kiddie porn stuff and dodging my arguments, then there's not much point is there? Yes. Stealing is bad. Your facts and your understanding of file sharing and its social implications are grossly misinformed.

 

Not surprisingly, this has gotten way out of hand.

I could start handing out infractions for all the belligerance and personal attacks that have built up in this thread. Instead, I am simply shutting it down.

Grow up, people. You know who you are.