[Web4lib] Kindle Lending

Wed Oct 27 10:29:42 EDT 2010

I think neither of these positions (ebook readers are awesome vs.
ebook readers are the devil) really tell the whole story. I agree with
Tim that, at this juncture, ebook readers are troublesome for
libraries because we are being forcibly pushed out of the distribution
channels. There are no acceptable library routes to lend ebooks, and
there should be. The doctrine of first sale should apply to ebooks,
but because we weren't actively a part of the development of these
models, they were designed in a way to allows sharing to be shut down
from the beginning. And why would publishers voluntarily want to
change that?

However, ereaders as devices are great, for a number of reasons
(including those mentioned in Robert's last post). It's a hugely
growing avenue for how people read. I personally come close to buying
one almost every day. And I think if libraries don't seriously start
to advocate for better sharing models, we'll be in trouble. I think we
need to use whatever clout we have to start loudly shouting for
library models for digital books.

The problem might be that there are so many positions in the library
world on what that sharing model should look like. Personally, I think
the closer it looks to the print sharing model, the better (i.e. a
copy can be loaned any number of times, but is unavailable to other
patrons while it's checked out; patrons don't get to keep a copy).
Either way, if we don't start pushing back against being shut out of
this part of the distribution model for books, we're screwed.

One of my colleagues suggested once, in a very off-the-cuff way, that
we should just start digitizing all of our own print books and
creating our own digital libraries. Legally, he thinks first sale
doctrine could potentially guide us, and that if a big enough
consortium started a project like this there might be enough strength
that a legal battle wouldn't be devastating to the library group. I
have not been able to stop thinking of this idea in the months since.
I think there's really something to it, but the longer we wait to make
a move, the more entrenched the publishers' ideas about ebooks as a
format will become. Didn't all those libraries Google worked with to
create Google Books get their own copies of the digital files? What
restrictions are there on what they can do with them? Does anyone
know?

I think we talk about this a lot, but I haven't personally need a lot
of real action, and advocacy for libraries in this area yet. What are
the next steps we need to take to put ourselves back in the picture?

Laura

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Robert Balliot <rballiot at gmail.com> wrote:
> Really?
>
> 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
> http://oceanstatelibrarian.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>

-- 
Laura Krier

http://www.lauraek.net
http://kitchenilliterate.wordpress.com