(whoops, maybe this should've been its own post, but hey. too lazy to do that right now.)
the current vast availability of fanfiction online [...] has trained a vast number of readers to expect to read stories for free.
Hrmmm. Been thinking about this since you posted, and gonna have to say: hmmm, not entirely certain I agree. Or at least, I don't think it's entirely fanfiction's fault -- the actual proportion of folks out there who read fanfic are an incredibly tiny percentage of the general net-going populace. For that matter, a lot of folks who read fanfic don't also read ofic; the drive/reason to read each can be very different. That is, just because you love this story does not mean you love all others -- so I might, instead, argue that the predominance of fanfiction has, at times, cut into the ofic market, b/c a chunk of readers would rather retell the same story than go looking for more, especially when the retelling is free and accessible.
No, I think the real foundation of the issue is that ebooks, like fanfiction, like online news articles, or downloaded iTunes, are electronic: there is nothing physical that you hold. It makes the product nebulous. It becomes expendable, in a way, or perhaps I should say 'disposable' -- it's not a 'real' thing.
We have a growing net-cultural association of "timely things" such that "e-files" are going to be dated just as fast as the rest of what we read: blogs, our own LJs, news articles: how many people really, truly, go back and read what someone's written two years ago? three years ago? we see the date and think, "oh, that's out-of-date, now," as though all information can expire. That's going to affect (effect?) all e-products, eventually, and already is, perhaps.
Which is one reason I think ebooks should emphasize they're like software -- that is, that you're buying a license to 'use' the product -- which is a thought-process we already understand as NOT being the same as "you read this online at the LA Times, and next week it'll be gone, so if you take it and do whatever, we don't care because next week, hey, who cares at all?"
I get that there's a business model underneath the Kindle et al, in that you're making consumers pay a lot for something, such that they can feel like they actually "bought" a product -- in hopes the $300 cost will transfer over and make the $5 ebook get part of that "here is something real", like by osmosis or something. But I think it's risky, and experientially not really working all that well -- because it seems consumers instead are acting like it's any other computer: I paid X-thousand dollars for this computer, how the hell can I afford anything but freeware, now?
I really, honestly, truly think it's time someone came up with a DRM that will let authors track down the original purchaser of a pirated copy -- and at the same time, not get in the way of we honest readers who don't get so bowled over by an e-product's fungible qualities that we forget it is, still, a product that requires us to respect its cost-to-use.
no subject
Date: 14 Jun 2009 05:31 pm (UTC)the current vast availability of fanfiction online [...] has trained a vast number of readers to expect to read stories for free.
Hrmmm. Been thinking about this since you posted, and gonna have to say: hmmm, not entirely certain I agree. Or at least, I don't think it's entirely fanfiction's fault -- the actual proportion of folks out there who read fanfic are an incredibly tiny percentage of the general net-going populace. For that matter, a lot of folks who read fanfic don't also read ofic; the drive/reason to read each can be very different. That is, just because you love this story does not mean you love all others -- so I might, instead, argue that the predominance of fanfiction has, at times, cut into the ofic market, b/c a chunk of readers would rather retell the same story than go looking for more, especially when the retelling is free and accessible.
No, I think the real foundation of the issue is that ebooks, like fanfiction, like online news articles, or downloaded iTunes, are electronic: there is nothing physical that you hold. It makes the product nebulous. It becomes expendable, in a way, or perhaps I should say 'disposable' -- it's not a 'real' thing.
We have a growing net-cultural association of "timely things" such that "e-files" are going to be dated just as fast as the rest of what we read: blogs, our own LJs, news articles: how many people really, truly, go back and read what someone's written two years ago? three years ago? we see the date and think, "oh, that's out-of-date, now," as though all information can expire. That's going to affect (effect?) all e-products, eventually, and already is, perhaps.
Which is one reason I think ebooks should emphasize they're like software -- that is, that you're buying a license to 'use' the product -- which is a thought-process we already understand as NOT being the same as "you read this online at the LA Times, and next week it'll be gone, so if you take it and do whatever, we don't care because next week, hey, who cares at all?"
I get that there's a business model underneath the Kindle et al, in that you're making consumers pay a lot for something, such that they can feel like they actually "bought" a product -- in hopes the $300 cost will transfer over and make the $5 ebook get part of that "here is something real", like by osmosis or something. But I think it's risky, and experientially not really working all that well -- because it seems consumers instead are acting like it's any other computer: I paid X-thousand dollars for this computer, how the hell can I afford anything but freeware, now?
I really, honestly, truly think it's time someone came up with a DRM that will let authors track down the original purchaser of a pirated copy -- and at the same time, not get in the way of we honest readers who don't get so bowled over by an e-product's fungible qualities that we forget it is, still, a product that requires us to respect its cost-to-use.