I don't know if I agree with the "I don't want to rent a book" philosophy anymore, actually. Some books I want to own and keep: reference books, art, fiction that changed my life. But a lot of the popcorn entertainment I read for fun? In the long long ago, in the before times, when there were no e-books, I bought them in paperback and then immediately turned around and either traded them in or donated them to library or charity. I didn't keep the majority of them. Almost none of the used bookstores gave money for used books, so I really didn't care where they went as long as they made room for new books.
In the same way, I don't really care if some of this crud vanishes. It's the equivalent of data I don't mind losing if the hard drive fails between back-ups. The amount I paid for them was not to "own it" but to "experience it." I have this experience online a lot (of not particularly wanting to keep something while still compensating for having used or enjoyed it), and use a museum metaphor to describe it. You pay entrance into a museum to see what's in it, but you don't come away with anything except those experiences unless you buy something additional at the gift shop.
I think as authors this change in paradigm has a lot of potential. If readers stop focusing on the object as the thing of monetary value and start thinking of their experience of the story as the thing they're paying for, then we no longer have to rely solely on books-as-objects for our income stream.
My point relates to Amazon's removal without consent of the purchaser of I think it was Animal Farm. Do NOT dig in the guts of my computer (or e-reader)without my consent! If my agreement is explicitly and very very clearly to allow you do so, you're still risking my ire :-). You choose your own hard drive risks and back-up material _you_ care about. You'd freak if I unilaterally decided x or y was old now and I could trash it.
I agree that was a stupid move on their part, but I appreciate their panic at the time: they discovered they were selling a pirated version of the book and wanted to Fix That Immediately. They should have handled it better, but they're moving into new territory and trying to make the rules. I think if instead of pulling all the copies of the book from people's kindles, they'd sent a message saying that "My bad, this is an illegal copy (and here's how that happened), you have a choice of a credit back to your account or we'll replace it with a legitimate version," people wouldn't have been as disturbed at the situation.
From my observation, the person they've got in Marketing calling these shots is handling all of them badly and I really wish they'd ditch that person and find someone a little more in tune with reality; the way they handled the recent MacMillan thing was a serious lost opportunity for them to come off as "the good guys" and they botched it.
Whatever the case, there's an off-switch for the network connection on my kindle for a reason, and I use it because I don't want Amazon messing with my e-reader. >.>
Yeah, agree. They've actually been handed on a platter opportunity to make some great publicity coups... and managed to turn all of them into own-goal disasters. I doubt if it's just marketing's shot-caller though. It looks more like that's the corporate culture they've developed. Too big, too powerful, too used to doing things however they like. From my experience it's the CEO who sets corporate culture so I doubt if they'll change.
In the same way, I don't really care if some of this crud vanishes. It's the equivalent of data I don't mind losing if the hard drive fails between back-ups. The amount I paid for them was not to "own it" but to "experience it." I have this experience online a lot (of not particularly wanting to keep something while still compensating for having used or enjoyed it), and use a museum metaphor to describe it. You pay entrance into a museum to see what's in it, but you don't come away with anything except those experiences unless you buy something additional at the gift shop.
I think as authors this change in paradigm has a lot of potential. If readers stop focusing on the object as the thing of monetary value and start thinking of their experience of the story as the thing they're paying for, then we no longer have to rely solely on books-as-objects for our income stream.
Reply
Reply
From my observation, the person they've got in Marketing calling these shots is handling all of them badly and I really wish they'd ditch that person and find someone a little more in tune with reality; the way they handled the recent MacMillan thing was a serious lost opportunity for them to come off as "the good guys" and they botched it.
Whatever the case, there's an off-switch for the network connection on my kindle for a reason, and I use it because I don't want Amazon messing with my e-reader. >.>
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment