Actually, I love the idea of Zombies in 1800′s England.

And Gone with the Wind was just an example. There are hundreds of titles that are out of print and still in copyright and are being quietly forgotten with time.

I basically want people to write whatever they want with Gone with the Wind and be able to share it with the world. (without infringing copyrights) If someone wants to add Zombies to the universe I think they should be allowed to. The author has been dead for decades, the book is as you said EVERYWHERE.

Also theft and copyright infringing aren’t the same thing. One deprives a person of property the other doesn’t.

Big money is relative. Few people would call what most authors with the major publishers make big money, but in comparison to small publisher authors who deal with poor distribution, the sum is princely. *grin*

The bigger markets also give an author a chance to grow their market share so that the money improves. That’s really hard to do with small publishers who are great for long term royalties but poor on long term growth.

Contact me privately by clicking on my name here and tell me what kind of book you have written, and I may be able to offer some hints on the best publishers to contact.

One of these (please see below)?

Who are the publishers who are publishing you, and earning “big money” for you?

(from RW: An aspiring author!)

Publisher Market Share

1 Random House 17.2%
2 HarperCollins 13.3%
3 Simon & Schuster 9.2%
4 Penguin 8.7%
5 Hachette 5.9%
6 Thomas Nelson 4.8%
7 St. Martin’s 3.2%
8 Tyndale 1.9%
9 John Wiley & Sons 1.7%
10 Scholastic 1.6%

The non-copyright alternatives only work if you are self-published, or if you keep your electronic rights when you are published in paper. Without major clout, authors can’t keep their electronic rights when they sign with a big paper publisher.

A fiction author who self-publishes might as well tattoo “LOSER” on her forehead because that’s the way many in big publishing and the reading world see her. Except for very rare occasions, the writer hurts herself and her reputation by self-publishing.

(I’m talking the publishing business’ perception here, not my opinion, so no angry emails from those who chose this path.)

For those of us who want to spend our careers with the big publishers where the real money is, self-publishing is no option so copyright alternatives are not an option.

Well, what precisely do they have? Can you tell us?

This is the problem you are up against, Marilynn – there is no legal ammunition in the world that can do what you want. You want to ban computers? Good luck with that! But you should realise that nothing less than banning computers is required.

In reality, governments have to balance the needs of a number of industries, and computer and telecommunications industries are larger, wealthier, and more influential than the publishing industry, Hollywood, and the recording industry put together.

“An analogy I used earlier is that publishing is an engine with a very small money/gas tank. The tank is small because publishing profits are very small.

If you siphon off enough money/gas, the engine sputters. A bit more, and the engine dies.”

Let’s take this analogy and run with it … if you really can’t stop people siphoning gas out of your car, why don’t you get a solar powered car? Or a bicycle? Or call a cab? If your vehicle keeps letting you down then why not consider some other vehicle? “Oranges are not the only fruit!”

Some of these non-copyright alternatives can offer you things that your old copyright-based business can’t offer you. But if you close your mind to them a priori and decide that copyright is the only tool you have, then you will miss out to other authors who are more open-minded. Better to be ahead of the game than to be a follower.

Try reading Cory’s books again. You may have a different response this time.::

I seriously doubt it. My real world experiences that disagree with his theories won’t disappear on a second reading.

Try reading Cory’s books again. You may have a different response this time.

Michael Pastore
50 Benefits of Ebooks

::We respect you as a person and a writer: but your ideas on this issue sound old-fashioned. What you have said here may (or may not) have been right for printed books, twenty years ago. Digital content is a far more complex — and more exciting — new world.

Read a book on this subject, by Cory Doctorow, or by Lawrence Lessig: his new book “Remix” is remarkable, and it’s a free PDF download.::

Saying I know nothing about these issues is seriously funny. Here’s a bit of my resume.

*I’ve been a publishing news junkie over thirty years and a writer for about as long.

*I’ve been involved in ebook publishing for eleven years.

*I’m one of the authors of ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING: THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE.

*I’m an expert on libraries and ebooks who gave seminars on epublishing and electronic issues to librarians who knew nothing about ebooks at the time.

*I’ve been a commentator on epublishing for a number of major magazines as well as websites.

*My ebooks broke ground by being the first reviewed in a number of magazines and major websites, the first in several major university libraries, the first to win major awards against name writers, etc., etc.

*I was one of the earliest members of EPIC, the electronically published authors group.

In other words, I was involved with these issues long before most of you knew they and ebooks existed.

I’ve read Doctorow, and many of his ideas are laughable because those of us who have been out on the front lines of this business have already proven his ideas simply won’t work, but he never bothered to ask the people with the experience. Why let facts get in the way of a pretty theory?

I have not read Lessing so I have no real opinion on him.

So, in other words, patronize me at your own risks, ebook newbies. *evil grin*

But let’s go back to the house and locks analogy, despite its flaws.

1. The locks are very very expensive, and they double or triple the mortgage payment you are paying on your home.

2. You can pay more and buy bigger locks, but they are no more effective than the smaller locks.

3. When the company that sells the locks goes out of business, then you can never again enter your own house. Nor can anyone else ever enter your house, even though you have given them house keys.

4. The locks prevent your friends and family members from ever entering your house — unless they destroy the locks, which they will not do. The locks prevent you from ever leaving your door open (unlocked), even for a moment, even if you want to run out to get your mail from the mailbox. (In short: the locks reduce the normal functionality of your house.)

5. The locks can be picked in less than a minute, and then anyone can get into your house.

6. Once the lock has been picked, the “burglar” can now grant access to your house to anyone he chooses. Or to thousands of other burglars, all at once.

The main point? … The locks on ebooks do not work. That’s the sad and glorious reality of digital content.

Marilynn, to me it seems as if everyone who has responded on this thread has the best of intentions. We have been trying to help you to understand how technology has completely changed the game.

We respect you as a person and a writer: but your ideas on this issue sound old-fashioned. What you have said here may (or may not) have been right for printed books, twenty years ago. Digital content is a far more complex — and more exciting — new world.

Read a book on this subject, by Cory Doctorow, or by Lawrence Lessig: his new book “Remix” is remarkable, and it’s a free PDF download.

Then you may see this issue with new and enlightened eyes.

Michael Pastore
50 Benefits of Ebooks

This battle against copyright theft needs to be waged on many fronts.

Publishers and the government must hit the crooks and hit them hard with all the legal ammunition they have. Make the thieves see that they will pay for theft.

Authors and others need to educate readers that copyright theft not only hurts the people who write and publish their books, it hurts the readers by driving up costs and by destroying the kinds of books they read.

Readers need to educate other readers that these pirates aren’t noble, they are thieves out to destroy the books readers love.

An analogy I used earlier is that publishing is an engine with a very small money/gas tank. The tank is small because publishing profits are very small.

If you siphon off enough money/gas, the engine sputters. A bit more, and the engine dies.

I love books, and I really don’t want to see that engine die. I hope I’ve changed a few minds here, or at least made some of you think a bit harder about the subject.

Your analogies between burglary and copyright infringement, and between locks and copyright laws are leading you astray. It’s actually not a valid analogy at all, and the conclusions you draw from it are also invalid. An analogy is only useful if it draws on correspondences which are real, rather than just “wished-for”. But consider how strong your analogy really is:

If you break into my house and steal my stuff, then when I get home from work my stuff is all gone! Whereas, if you infringe on my copyright, I don’t necessarily have any way to even notice that. If you are a thief, then obviously you will be well aware of it, and that you’re committing a crime. But one can easily infringe a copyright without even knowing it, accidentally, or in ignorance of copyright law, or in ignorance of the copyright status of a work. Finally, being a burglar takes some guts, and entails serious risks, whereas file-sharing is trivially easy and virtually risk-free. You can set up your computer to do it for you automatically while you’re doing something else. This is the reality “on the ground” – don’t think I’m condoning it, I’m just stating the facts here. You may not like it, but that’s undeniably the way it is.

Now, you think that your legal apparatus (“locks”) can be strengthened, and the internet can be strictly regulated, etc, such that your property can be effectively protected, but I believe if you knew more about piracy in the digital era you wouldn’t be nearly so sanguine. The changes you would require would be so far-reaching that they would be impossible to implement, because they would necessarily require detailed regulation of all internet traffic and all computers. Even if the creative industries were generally in favour of this, the telecommunications and computer industries would generally not be, and they are much bigger and more powerful. In a practical political sense, you are up against it!

You clearly have an emotional commitment to the institution of copyright (and not without reason of course), but you obviously also know that many people don’t. What counts, ultimately, is whether it’s going to work in reality, not whether it’s “morally right” (or whether it fits your analogy with theft).

So I’d urge you to stop thinking analogically about this and look long and hard at the actual reality of file-sharing, etc. Why not try it out yourself, just to find out how it works and what you’re up against? Perhaps that will help you find a way to make money that doesn’t involve the use of “locks” (metaphorically speaking).

Otherwise, I suspect that (as others have pointed out) once digital technology takes off in literature (the way it has already in music and films), you are going to be blind-sided.

A Congressional hearing is now being broadcast live: the subject is the future of newspapers. See the Huffington Post home page for the link to the live broadcast.

That discussion is very pertinent to this one about copyrights and the future of media. Especially Arianna Huffington’s remarks about free digital access.

Most of the big publishers are finally beginning to figure out what those of us in small publishing and epublishing have known for over ten years. You’ve got to give a reader information and excerpts.

Most of the online retailers are just as slow about giving the reader more information about the books.

If you find a book while browsing, the best thing to do is Google the author’s name. The first hit is usually the author’s website, and most have a chapter or two up to read.


::If intellectual property was declared real property, that would be heaps of fun. We could resell all our ebooks and mp3s then. Excellent!::

Afraid not. The rules of “The Doctrine of First Sale” would still apply because you’d be selling intellectual property, not a physical thing like a book or CD. You could sell a used paper book, but not a used ebook.


::The other thing about Cory Doctorow of course is that he is extremely talented, whereas authors like Marilynn are just the reverse.::

It’s a waste of time to insult a professional author. Some people think that authors are as easy a target as a crybaby nerd in public school so we get lots of insults, mainly from bullies who haven’t read us or are incapable of writing a page-long letter to their mother.

Authors who can’t deal with the insults don’t stay in the profession very long. I’ve been at it for over twenty years, I write romance, and I’m an ebook pioneer so I’ve listened to more stupid, playground insults than half a dozen people receive in their lifetimes.

Doctorow is certainly more financially successful than I am, but it’s hard to compare us directly since we write for different markets. Since both of us have won major awards against our peers and have lots of stellar reviews, I’d say we’re probably equal in craft.