Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

shelftalkblog.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 159 posts

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#21

Post by thayne »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #14
koolba wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

And while we are at it, make it so if a work goes out of "print", then the copyright expires.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#22

Post by greyface- »

dmbche wrote: 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…

People say that if public libraries didn't already exist and were proposed today as a new thing, they'd be found illegal.

I agree that they've sort of lost the plot by taking this digital lending stuff seriously.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#23

Post by praxulus »

waveBidder wrote: post #20

Honestly at this point, I feel like the ethical thing to do is "steal" digital and buy/borrow physical, the copyright surrounding digital goods has been so thoroughly gamed in the favor of publishers.

Is there reason to believe authors aren't getting a cut of the library license costs?

I used to buy my ebooks until I realized libraries had ebook catalogues. A large portion of the books I've borrowed are sales the author lost, they ought to be compensated somehow.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#24

Post by gostsamo »

dmbche wrote: 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 feels like how electric cars add artifical engine sounds.

A side note, there is some sense in the artificial sounds of the ev engines. I'm blind and if not for them, I might be dead in five years, together with many no so attentive people.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#25

Post by waveBidder »

cortesoft wrote: post #15
dmbche wrote: 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.

a couple of alternatives are donation models (patreon), or quadratic funding, where a common pool is used to provide the incentive to contribute to the creation of a public good at the actual value you get out of it (see Radical Markets for a description). there's definitely others- the main problem is there are powerful actors who benefit greatly from the status quo, and coordination is hard.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#26

Post by thayne »

Now imagine the impact of those high ebook costs on more rural, or even suburban libraries.

These libraries have less money to spend on expensive ebook subscriptions, but at the same time ebooks are much more useful to patrons who live a long ways from the library and may have difficulty going to check out physical books.

The same probably applies to libraries that serve more impoverished populations.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#27

Post by kazinator »

> 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.

That "even" looks out of place. Since I would expect some digital detritus that can be reproduced in unlimited copies at close to zero cost to cost less, then I would say that it "sometimes even costs more than the actual book".

It's not surprising when it's less; "even" adds emphasis on some parameter that has gone beyond expectation.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#28

Post by phantomathkg »

koolba wrote: post #10
teeray wrote: 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…

> We could have public libraries be entirely outside the copyright system. I doubt it’d have a material effect on production of new books.

I really wish this could be the case, but I strongly doubt, which ever country we are in, the politicians we voted in will be on our sides.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#29

Post by kazinator »

dmbche wrote: 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's beyond odd; it's simply idiotic. You would not "buy down" holds for physical books, or not to a ridiculous degree. If there are 100 holds for some book, you're not going to go out and buy 75 or whatever. Why do it for e-books? Cause, wee, they don't take up shelf space in the stacks?

If a book is popular, let the patrons "buy down" their own copy, or else wait behind 90 other people.

There is always bittorrent and filez websites: the real libraries of the digital age.

There are also ... craploads of other worthwhile books you could explore that are not held.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#30

Post by waveBidder »

praxulus wrote: post #23
waveBidder wrote: post #20

Honestly at this point, I feel like the ethical thing to do is "steal" digital and buy/borrow physical, the copyright surrounding digital goods has been so thoroughly gamed in the favor of publishers.

Is there reason to believe authors aren't getting a cut of the library license costs? I used to buy my ebooks until I realized libraries had ebook catalogues. A large portion of the books I've borrowed are sales the author lost, they ought to be compensated somehow.

oh I'm sure they get /something/, its just not proportional to the their contribution.

I'm out of the habit of using the library because I was far away from one, but my normal approach is to just buy the physical copies of the book, regardless of whether I read that or the physical one. There are publishers who go out of their way to be drm free and i do make a point to buy those (Tor comes to mind).

Post reply on HN