But a decision by publisher HarperCollins to limit the circulation of library e-books is rousing librarians, who have started a boycott via blogs and Twitter protesting what some consider the digital "destruction" of books.
Under a policy that began Monday, libraries can "lease" (for a fee) new HarperCollins e-books and loan them no more than 26 times. At that point, the book disappears — digitally — unless the library pays to lease another copy for the next 26 readers. (Libraries lend e-books one at a time, just like print, unless multiple copies are bought.)
"Of course the librarians went crazy," says Marilyn Johnson, author of This Book Is Overdue: How Librarians and Cybrarians Can Save Us All, published last year by HarperCollins. "Think about it: 'I'm the 27th patron; I see that the book is in the catalog, and then suddenly it's not?' "
It's the latest dispute triggered by the growing popularity of e-books that has pitted publishers against online retailer Amazon (over prices) and publishers against agents and authors (over royalties and rights).
Two other major publishers — Simon & Schuster (home to Stephen King) and Macmillan (Kristin Hannah) — do not sell e-books to libraries.
HarperCollins, which publishes Elmore Leonard, Sarah Palin, Paulo Coelho and other best-selling authors, isn't answering questions but posted a letter on its Library Love Fest blog:
"Selling e-books to libraries in perpetuity, if left unchanged, would undermine the emerging e-book eco-system, hurt the growing e-book channel, place additional pressure on physical bookstores, and in the end lead to a decrease in book sales and royalties paid to authors."
It also says, "If a library decides to repurchase an e-book later in the book's life, the price will be significantly lower as it will be pegged to a paperback price."
But librarians, faced with budget cuts, are protesting online:
•"It's never pretty when a publisher decides they have to destroy books in order to save their business model," Kelly Clever, a librarian at Seton Hill University in Greensburg, Pa., wrote on Twitter.
•"It would almost seem as if (publishers) are trying to force us back to print only," Sarah Houghton-Jan, deputy director of the San Rafael (Calif.) Public Library, wrote on her blog (librarianinblack.net). "Oh what a sad day for publishers. You are killing your own business."
Several regional library systems, including St. Louis; Albany, N.Y.; Worcester, Mass.; and Norman, Okla., have joined a boycott, saying they won't buy HarperCollins e-books.
The South Sioux City (Neb.) Library isn't buying any HarperCollins books — print or digital.
"We're just a little blip on the prairie against a giant corporation," library director David Mixdorf says. "But we needed to make a statement. I fear other publishers will do the same."
He says the boycott isn't censorship: "If someone wants a new HarperCollins book (print or e-book), we'll get it through inter-library loan" from other libraries.
American Library Association president Roberta Stevens says legally it can't support any boycott: "That's up to individual libraries."
She was surprised by HarperCollins' decision but not by the protests. "Library budgets are being cut everywhere," she says. "Librarians are just being responsive to the public."
She hopes the librarians' new task force on "equitable access to electronic content" can work collaboratively with publishers: "It's ultimately in their interests to make books available in libraries — in all formats."
No comments:
Post a Comment