This was written by Mitch Freedman, aka my father:
Interestingly, The New York Times article (March 15, 2011) on the boycott by libraries of HarperCollins e-books omitted two fundamental points:
- The great profits publishers make by selling e-books
With e-books, the publishers have eliminated paper, printing, binding, distribution and returns by publishing books electronically--thus dramatically reducing their publication costs. Publishing everything in e-book format was their dream because of the reduced costs to the publisher. This view was expressed by Jack Romanos, then head of Simon & Schuster, at an e-books conference in Washington about 10 years ago. Not having to share profits with Baker & Taylor, etc. and the few remaining bookstores make e-books a great product and a money-maker. I don't know the per cent Overdrive and other e-book firms pay for the right to distribute e-books, but--intuitively, at least--it would net far more money for the publisher given the whole B&T-like apparatus required to fulfill orders for physical books, offices for selectors & buyers and warehousing, plus selling and physically distributing the books. to libraries or its other customers..
- The first-sale doctrine and what it guarantees for libraries
Clearly HarperCollins (a Rupert Murdoch-owned subsidiary of his News Corporation) wants not only to pocket all of these savings, but take away the benefits of the first-sale doctrine. U.S. libraries have always enjoyed via the device of a license. Specifically the first-sale doctrine means that if a library buys a book, it is free to circulate it as often as it chooses without any per usage charge, royalty, or externally imposed limitation. HarperCollins wants to limit library e-books to 26 circulations--thus abridging the right of the first-sale doctrine. It knows it is not illegal because libraries aren't "purchasing" the e-book, they're acquiring a limited use license to circulate it. However HarperCollins is the only publisher of which we are aware that wants to limit the libraries' use, i.e. 26 circs.
The libraries can choose to view the license as not affecting the right of first purchase and boycott those vendors--beginning with HarperCollins--that set limits on circulations via the license device.
This is why I strongly advocate and support the HarperCollins boycott. Circumventing the 1st-sale doctrine via the license agreement does not mean that libraries have to accept the license provisions. There is nothing to stop libraries applying the spirit of the 1st sale doctrine in their e-book procurements.
Simply, libraries should only enter into agreements for e-book licenses which provide unlimited circulations.
Forgive the cliché, but HarperCollins is the proverbial camel getting its nose in the tent. If libraries accede to license-limiting circulation; it is not too great a leap to think--once the precedent is established—that other e-book publishers will follow.
In the article's concluding paragraph, I was disappointed with the librarian who said that ultimately some accommodation would have to be made between e-book publishers and libraries.
There is no middle ground on this issue. E.g. There can be no middle ground or compromise between the conflicting positions that the Earth was created in 7 days and is 6,000 years old according to creationists; and the position of modern science that asserts that the Earth is over 4 billion years old. The contentions are mutually exclusive. There is no splitting the difference or accommodation which can be made regarding these polar opposite positions. Which is how I see the HarperCollins licenses. There is no compromise between unlimited and limited.
Librarians must stand rock solid against any proposition that would imperil the libraries' unlimited circulation of e-books.
The principle that has always applied to printed book purchases must be applied to e-books. There is no reason we can’t subject e-book licenses to that condition.
I urge all librarians to not enter into licenses with HarperCollins or any other publisher that wants to limit the number of library circulations.
Maurice J. Freedman, 16 March 2011
ALA Past President
Publisher, The U*N*A*B*A*S*H*E*DTM, the 'how I run my library good'SM letter