Live data from Hacker News

The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

shelftalkblog.wordpress.com

11–20 of 159 posts

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#11

I find the limits at ny libraries to be exceptionally high. Why does anyone need 25 digital books checked out at a time? That’d probably help with waitlists too. I love Libby, I want to see it survive.

I like having huge wait-list so that I can put entire series on hold (like wheel of time), maybe I'm manipulating the system a little too much.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#13

I find the limits at ny libraries to be exceptionally high. Why does anyone need 25 digital books checked out at a time? That’d probably help with waitlists too. I love Libby, I want to see it survive.

People read for reasons beyond pleasure. I might be doing a study or comparing authors, I might be reporting on history or researching someone. I might be doing a comparative analysis.

Ten checkouts seems low enough that it's likely to get regularly cause problems. 100 checkouts seems too high. So start bisecting. 50? Almost certainly too high. 25 maybe reasonable.

They also might have p90 checkout rates and found that 25 is a data driven choice. Librarians are smart people.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#14
post #10
post #6

> While there are many types of licenses, the most common license needs to be purchased and then re-purchased every year. Forcing libraries to repurchase their entire collection every year should be illegal. I would also settle for a loophole that would allow the library to OCR a physical copy they own and then own the resulting digital copy.

> Forcing libraries to repurchase their entire collection every year should be illegal. We could have public libraries be entirely outside the copyright system. I doubt it’d have a material effect on production of new books. If as a society we have a problem that our libraries are too popular, then that’s probably a good thing. > I would also settle for a loophole that would allow the library to OCR a physical copy t…

The much, much simpler, cheaper, and broad solution is to reduce copyright length to 10 years. Or even 15 years.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#15
post #8

"What do holds have to do with the cost of digital books? This may seem surprising, but patron holds are the single biggest factor in rising costs. To maintain reasonable wait times, the Library buys additional licenses of a digital title when patrons place more holds on it. That means that when hundreds of patrons place holds on a single New York Times bestseller, the costs of “buying down the holds” can quickly bec…

It is how everything in the digital age works - artificial scarcity. It does seem silly, although I also struggle to think how else we can make the whole thing work.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#17
While the change makes sense, I can't help but feel that the system can be managed more intelligently. For example, if I have 15 books "on hold" on Libby, there's no reason for the library to treat the #15 book with the same priority as #1 and spend more money to buy additional licenses for it.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#19
post #4

> As a consumer, when you buy an e-book or e-audiobook, it costs about the same or sometimes even less than the print book version. But for libraries, the e-book or e-audiobook version of a title actually costs up to three times or more than the print version. > This is because publishers use a licensing model for selling e-books to libraries. Each copy of a digital book title requires a purchase of a license. While…

I think the sadder part of this is that this licensing model means that a cartel of publishers will set ebook pricing as high as possible to squeeze every surplus dime out of libraries. High enough to make libraries make extremely difficult budgeting systems but not high enough to strangle their golden geese.

In the past, libraries could buy physical books and that was it. But once, own forever. Maybe they’d need to purchase a lot of copies of popular books or replace damaged and lost items. Otherwise, the rest of the money could go toward local programs that help the community.

Now, publishers will try to essentially extract surplus funds away from the community for extra profit margins that they don’t need to stay in business. In the past, a library that stopped buying books still had books. Now, a library that fails to pay their tithe will become a shell.

Post reply on HN