[Web4lib] Kindle Lending

Robert Balliot rballiot at gmail.com
Wed Oct 27 09:02:35 EDT 2010


We gave my 70 something mother a Kindle for her birthday.  I think it
was the 3g type.

She loves it.
She brings it with her.
She can easily read the type.
The books are relatively inexpensive.
The device is very lightweight.
It does not require directed lighting.
She does not need to drive to the library to pick up materials or check them in.

If she uses LibraryThing and creates a book club group, she could
share titles nationwide.

How is that not exponentially better?

R. Balliot

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Tim Spalding <tim at librarything.com> wrote:
> Look, strictly speaking, this doesn't affect libraries whatsoever.
> Non-personal use of Kindles is expressly prohibited under their terms.
> Some libraries are playing with Kindle lending, ignoring the
> prohibition and hoping nobody notices. Eventually publishers and
> Amazon will take action, much as British Publishers did recently in
> cracking down on distance lending of ebooks.
> The situation is simple. Publishers want to restrict library lending
> of ebooks, unless they can recoup retail-like money for each rental.
> They The first sale doctrine allowed libraries to buy books on the
> same terms as anyone else, and lend them out like nobody else
> did--extracting significantly higher value from them. Publishers and
> authors never really liked that arrangement, and now that they have a
> licensed good to sell, they can stop it. People who think publishers
> will allow libraries to buy and lend ebooks as before are kidding
> themselves.
> As far as users go, the full details aren't available, but it is said
> to resemble the B&N "lending" which:
> * Only applies to some titles, at the publisher's discretion (which is
> constrained by author rights agreements).
> * Can only be done once per title, for two weeks.
> This isn't "exponentially more valuable," even to a solitary consumer.
> It's marginally more valuable than previous ebook licenses, and
> exponentially less free than non-digital book rights.
> Lastly, and with respect, I want to express profound confusion why
> librarians would promote a device that cuts libraries out, and that
> incorporates monitoring and censorship mechanisms profoundly counter
> to often-expressed ethical standards. That ebook cut libraries out is
> clear to me, but I acknowledge some don't agree. But look at the
> privacy issue. A few years ago many librarians went mad over the
> prospect that the federal government might make requests for check-out
> records for individual patrons suspected of terrorism. I have seen no
> outrage as over promoting devices that continually monitor and record
> everything you read, when you read it, who you shared it with, and
> every annotation you make, and put it in a cloud-based service—which
> triggers a lower standard of legal protection—under control of a
> company in no way responsive to library ethics.
> Sincerely,
> Tim
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Robert Balliot <rballiot at gmail.com> wrote:
>> First we had the gigantic price drop in Kindles, now they become
>> exponentially more valuable as sharing devices:
>> http://bit.ly/8YzWu7
>> How will this impact lending libraries - public and academic?  A pooled list
>> of books using a book club could create a dynamic shared resource, not
>> unlike the public library model.
>> R. Balliot
>> http://oceanstatelibrarian.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> --
> Check out my library at http://www.librarything.com/profile/timspalding

More information about the Web4lib mailing list