Maybe I'm not reading this right, but Amazon is paying for titles to the book publishers on the reader's behalf in order to lend these titles for free to readers. The book publishers are getting paid. Admittedly it's a wholesale price instead of a retail price, but I'd rather get wholesale price for 10 books people read at no cost than get retail price for the 1 book people were willing to pay for. Isn't this a GOOD deal for the publishers?
Have these authors ever been to library? My god what are they thinking at these places loaning books to people without charging them. Maybe Amazon should stop selling these greedy authors titles see how they like that. But that will never happen cause in the end it's all about the $$
Amazon is paying for it, so why can't they do what they want with it? If I'm in the wholesale business and you buy 1000 or 10,000,000 from me, I could careless what you do with it. I already made my money. Why should the publishers dictate how Amazon makes theirs?
Agents and publishers think they should get a bigger cut of an Author's work, maybe? What percentage of sales of a printed book sold does an author get? I'm not sure how this is going to affect what they receive negatively. Sounds like a win-win for authors and publishers.
i don't see why amazon needs to do business with publishers in the first place. if an author types their book on a laptop/computer, they can send a copy to amazon, then amazon can publish it. what's the point of a middle-man?
If Amazon is paying the wholesale price, then the author is getting paid the same. Book stores buy at the wholesale price, and the retail price defines the markup where the Retailer is making a profit. So Basically as long as the wholesale price is being paid, and paid for every book being read then the publishers and authors are making exactly the same ... if not more because those people who read those books might never had read the book if they had to pay for it in the first place.
What the authors are getting bent out of shape for is that anytime there is a new distribution model, it is a chance for them to negotiate pricing and compensation for that new model.
[citation][nom]SLABBO[/nom]that's exactly what I was thinking. If publishers could put DRM on books, I bet they would.[/citation]
Booksellers already put DRM on books, books purchased from B&N and Amazon can not be moved to another e-reader unless that e-reader is supported by their service. A good example is if you purchased a book on the Nook, you will not be able to read it on the Amazon Fire unless you can install the Nook App on the Fire.
The issue is simple, the publishers refused to participate, yet Amazon went ahead and placed their content there. This has the potential to blow up both ways. The idea of E-lending books is based on the way physical libraries operate, but is not quite the same in the end. Ultimately, if the publishers said "no" their request to stay out of the service should have been honored.
Another excuse for lawyers to drive up their pay negotiating contracts.
For the record though, Amazon is no angel in this situation. They are trying to weasel their original contracts instead of negotiating new contracts for these types of transactions. Also, while they call their service a library, it is NOT the same as the public library system. Amazon is not offering a fully free library as a public service in the pursuit of knowledge, they are using their "library" as a marketing tool to sell Kindles. It is still a private service of the company for Prime members. It isn't comparable to the public library system.
Now, it seems like Amazon would get the worst of this because they have to buy a book to loan one, so I feel like there's something we're missing from this story. They could just set down a new contract that allows for loans, so why not just do it? I'm not on the publishers side either though, they're probably refusing to go along with it because they want to make more money. Once books start getting lent with a great deal more convenience than a public library, people might stop wanting to pay for them. The average person isn't going to read a book more than once, unless it's reference material. Loaning is a dangerous idea for authors.
[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom].Now, it seems like Amazon would get the worst of this because they have to buy a book to loan one, so I feel like there's something we're missing from this story.[/citation]
It could also be that Amazon is eating this cost as a way of potentially getting new customers through extra features.