Piracy... Again

In the past 24 hours, four separate writers have emailed me to tell me my books are being stolen online.

Well... no duh.

The internet was created to share and distribute data. It's the whole reason the world wide web exists.

Of course some of that data is going to be copyright-protected work. If it can be digitized, it can, and will, be shared.

What continues to amaze me is how freaked-out authors are by this. The thought that someone is sharing their work--without paying for it--seems to evoke the same reaction as having someone hack your bank account and drain your life savings.

As you see by the recent picture, I'm being pirated. Google pointed to 8880 different sites where my work is being illegally shared. And these are just torrent sites. This doesn't count file lockers, which I believe account for many more downloads than torrents.

And yet, I'm not worried. I'm currently selling 220 ebooks per day, and that rate shows no signs of slowing down.

So everyone needs to take a big, collective breath, let it out slow, and stop worrying about illegal file sharing. Here are some reasons why.

1. Copyright is unenforceable in a digital world. Period. Exclamation point. At no time in history has any individual, company, or industry been able to stop file sharing. No country or law has been able to stop it. No technology has been able to stop it. Which brings us to...

2. People want to share files. There is this much file sharing going on for a reason. It's what people want. Fighting piracy is fighting human nature. This is a battle no one can win. Getting your undies in a bunch at the thought of someone copying your ebook is a waste of a good ulcer. Worry about some problem that eventually will be solved. Like world hunger. Or cancer. Or war. Those will be conquered before file sharing is.

3. There is ZERO reliable evidence that file-sharing hurts sales. A shared file does not equal a lost sale, any more than someone reading a library book is a lost sale.

My ebooks that I'm selling on Amazon and Smashwords are available for FREE on my website. As in "they cost zero dollars." And yet the ebooks keep selling. Clearly, being able to get something for free doesn't inhibit sales.

4. The more people who know who you are, the better. File sharing certainly helps spread brand awareness and name recognition, and it does so without any effort on your part.

Now we'll take some questions.

Q: But Joe, if everyone steals your ebooks, how will you make money?

A: Show me an artist bankrupted by piracy, and we'll revisit this question.

Q: No, seriously, in a future where everything is free, how will...

A: We're not in a future where everything is free. But I'll play the "let's pretend" game. Let's pretend that all ebooks are free. How will writers make money? The same way all media makes money. Advertising, merchandising, and licensing.

Q: But I don't want ads in ebooks.

A: I don't want ads in anything. But that's how capitalism works. Deal with it.

Q: Piracy is immoral, and illegal. We need to spread awareness, then people will stop doing it.

A: Sure... that's how religion was able to successfully put a halt to masturbation, pre-marital and extra-marital sex. And why the US successfully won the war on drugs.

Illegal doesn't matter. People do what they want to do. Immoral is subjective. And teaching people to behave in a way contrary to human nature DOES NOT WORK.

Q: If I create something, I should have the right to do what I want with it, and make money from it. Piracy takes that right away from me.

A: No it doesn't. The vast majority of piracy doesn't monetarily benefit the pirate. It's simply sharing, where no one makes a profit.

Q: That's not true. The sites that host piracy make a lot of money.

A: So does Google. So does any popular website. But those sites aren't making money off the illegal sales of your material. They simply facilitate sharing.

Q: Why doesn't anyone close those sites?

A: They try. Then new sites come up. It is unstoppable.

Q: But I don't want my writing to be shared.

A: Then don't write. Simple as that. JK Rowling has lost millions of dollars, because she refused to let Harry Potter come out in ebook form. Newsflash: you can get ebooks of all the Potter books from pirate sites. She didn't cater to her fans, so her fans catered to themselves. And if Rowling can't stop it, with her billions and armies of layers, you can't either.

Q: Piracy is theft, pure and simple.

A: That's not actually a question. And that's not actually true. First of all, the stealing of a physical object deprives the owner of that object, which is a monetary loss. Copying a file does not deprive the owner of that file--the owner still has it.

Q: It's the theft of intellectual property.

A: Okay, even though I think this point is pretty much useless, I'll play.

Have you ever read a library book? Recorded a song off the radio? Tivo'ed a show and zipped through the commercials? Lent a CD to a friend? Rented a movie or videogame? Bought a used book?

Guess what--you just experienced someone else's intellectual property without compensating the artist.

We could play "gray areas" and "where to draw the line" all day. It ultimately comes down to what constitutes ownership of intellectual property--actually owning a tangible object, or experiencing it sensually?

If the IP argument is that every time you sensually experience a work of art you should compensate the artist, then we're all thieves. But if stealing isn't about the experience, it's about the tangible object, then sharing intangible objects, such as data files, is not stealing.

Q: Look, it's stealing, no matter how you try to justify it. We need to create better technology to make sure that pirates can't steal.

A: There's a reason iTunes no longer uses DRM (digital rights management, the industry standard for copy protection.) Because PEOPLE DON'T WANT DRM.

Do you know who wants DRM? Artists and companies who don't know what the hell they're doing because they have knee jerk reactions to the word "piracy."

If you really fear piracy, educate yourself. Read about it. Learn how it's done. Hear both sides defend their positions.

If you have an ounce of brains in your head, you will quickly realize that piracy is always going to be here, that nothing can be done to stop it, that artists can still make money, and that you'd be much better off worrying about something you have control over, like writing more and better books.

And next time you see your ebook on a file sharing site, don't say, "Oh no! I'm being stolen!" Instead say, "Cool, I'm being read." That's what I do.

Addendum:

There are some dissenting opinions in the comments thread, so I just wanted to clarify and distill some of my thoughts. I'm not sure how I went from "don't worry about piracy" to being a full advocate for piracy, but I'd like to make it clear that I believe piracy is stealing. I simply do not equate it with stealing something tangible.

I'd also like to offer my final (for the moment) thoughts:

1. You CANNOT assume that a downloaded free book is a lost sale. It isn't 1 for 1.

In some cases, the pirate would have never bought the book in the first place.
In some cases, the pirate does buy the book, and other books by the author.
In some cases, the book languishes on a hard drive, never read at all.
In some cases, the pirate would have never even been aware of the book or the author without finding it on the file sharing site.

And so on.

2. It is impossible to prove the effect of file sharing on sales without actually interviewing every single pirate and having them answer truthfully about their sharing and buying habits.

3. Industries can lose money for many reasons. There is no study that clearly shows piracy is the only cause, or even proves it is part of the cause.

4. Piracy is big business for groups that make money studying and combating piracy. Fair, unbiased reports are hard to come by, especially when capitalism and politics are involved.

5. I have shown significant growth in the face of freebies and piracy. So have many others.
While it is impossible to prove a direct link between piracy and sales, showing rising sales in the face of piracy is a damn good indicator that piracy isn't harmful. Or if it is harmful, it isn't enough to impact growth.

This isn't opinion. It is fact. And it is repeatable.

You cannot prove piracy has harmed you. But I can prove it hasn't harmed me. Ergo, my argument is sound.

6. Don't worry about what you can't control. You'll sleep better.

7. The only way to combat piracy is with cost and convenience, which I have blogged about before.

More Authors Guild Nonsense

I was willing to ease up on my constant critiques of the Authors Guild, because last week they did something I thought was a step in the right direction. They blogged about how publishers need to increase ebook rates.

Good for the Authors Guild, for addressing an issue that would benefit authors. They get a polite golf clap for their effort.

Why not a rousing, standing ovation?

As far as I know, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, the Authors Guild Fair Contract Initiative thusfar isn't putting any pressure on the Big 5.

In the coming months, the Authors Guild will address the major inequities and critical issues in many boilerplate contract terms. (...) It is time for publishers to eliminate one-sided agreements and policies that are patently unfair. We hope the Fair Contract Initiative can be the first step in that process. 

So, on the surface, it seems that the AG is doing what it should have been doing since its formation; advocating and fighting for the rights of writers. Their mission statement is:

...to support working writers. We advocate for the rights of writers by supporting free speech, fair contracts, and copyright. We create community and we fight for a living wage.

One simply needs to search my blog to read about the many times the AG has sided with publishers over authors. But this Fair Contract Initiative seems like it is making an effort to better serve its members, and seems like a step toward fighting for better contract terms with publishers.

So far, however, it's only publicly acknowledging a problem that the majority of writers have known about since publishers insisted on Agency Pricing: ebook royalties suck.

While public acknowledgement is the first step, it isn't enough. The AG has been acknowledging this for years. Where is the call to action? Where is the petition demanding change? Where are the letters to the CEOs of the major publishers saying the current situation is unacceptable?

Maybe all of this is coming soon. Inform first (even if it is information we've all known for a very long time), then take action.

But a few days later, the AG sent a letter to Congress insisting they do more to combat piracy. So apparently they can, and do, take action. Just not against publishers.

Where's the letter to Congress asking them to investigate the Big 6 and their history of price fixing (what other industry prints prices on their product, but doesn't try to undercut competitors on price? Hint: cartels), identical unconscionable contract terms, stranglehold on book distribution, terrible royalties, and general ongoing abuse of writers and readers for more than 30 years?

Answer: there is no letter. To anyone. Only a blog post saying 50% royalties is fair. It concludes with:

We hope that established authors and, particularly, bestselling authors will start to push back and stand up to publishers on the royalty rate—on behalf of all authors, as well as themselves.

So, here is the guild that authors pay a annual fee to join, so said guild can advocate for writers, and the Authors Guild basically tells them to help themselves.

No show of force. No demands. No promise of support.

Maybe a golf clap was too much.

But if the issue is piracy, which doesn't involve biting the hand that feeds, to Congress we must go!

Now this piracy nonsense is among the most egregiously shitty things the Authors Guild has done. Anyone with two functioning neurons and a passing understanding of how the world wide web works knows the term "net neutrality" (namely that Internet service providers and governments should treat all data on the Internet equally, without discrimination.)

This is a Really Big Deal. Once ISPs and governments begin to police what can and can't be viewed on the Internet, it becomes a First Amendment/censorship fight, which anyone who values freedom (which is everyone but maniacal dictators) should rightfully abhor.

This reached a head in 2012 with SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy bill introduced by some idiot in Congress.

Provisions included the requesting of court orders to bar advertising networks and payment facilities from conducting business with infringing websites, and search engines from linking to the websites, and court orders requiring Internet service providers to block access to the websites. The proposed law would have expanded existing criminal laws to include unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content, imposing a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

That's right. Your government wants to put you in jail for half a decade for torrenting yesterday's episode of Game of Thrones.

Naturally, there was resistance. On January 18, 2012, the English Wikipedia, Google, and an estimated 7,000 other smaller websites coordinated a service blackout, in protest against the bill. As they should.

Well, your Authors Guild wants to bring SOPA back.

ISPs have the ability to monitor piracy. Technology that can identify and filter pirated material is now commonplace. It only makes sense, then, that ISPs should bear the burden of limiting piracy on their sites.

Hoo boy.

So let's get the government to force ISPs to censor websites.

Slippery slope, anyone?

No doubt the AG knows this idea wipes its ass with the First Amendment. Freedom of Speech is pretty damn important, especially for a group of writers who make their livings trafficking in words. In sending this letter to Congress, the Authors Guild must have overwhelming evidence that piracy harms writers, and this harm must be so egregious that we should be willing to ignore the Bill of Rights in order to stop it.

Right?

Wrong.

I have yet to see a single controlled study that conclusively shows the financial impact piracy has on sales.

The publishing industry as a whole loses $80 to $100 million to piracy annually, according to the Association of American Publishers.

Sure it does. How is this figure determined? Where's the math? Where's the data? Where's the proof?

A common fallacy of piracy paranoiacs is that a pirated book equals a lost sale.

Here are several reasons this is untrue.

1. A pirate wouldn't have necessarily bought the book.
2. With file sharing, there is no tangible loss of physical property.
3. A pirate who downloads a book may then buy that book, or other titles by that author.
4. There is no data to show how many pirated books are actually read.
5. Studies have shown that file sharing doesn't harm sales, and may actually boost revenue.
6. Currently copyright law is woefully out of date, and needs to be reformed.

If someone breaks into your warehouse and steals $100 million worth of goods, that's a $100 million loss. If someone uploads your book to the Pirate Bay and shares it with 1000 people, there is no way to estimate loss. It might even be a gain, as obscurity is a writer's biggest hurdle to overcome.

The hysteria over file sharing is emotion-based. Intellectual property law doesn't apply well to a digital world, and global attitudes toward file sharing are changing as more and more people find it acceptable. At the same time, digital media sales and subscription services are thriving. Money is rolling in. This fear is all unfounded, and cannot be connected to any artist's pocketbook.

67% of our authors earn less than poverty level from their writing

And global warming is directly linked to the the declining number of seafaring pirates in the world.

This is one of the oldest fallacies in the book, confusing correlation with causality. Hey! Authors Guild! Maybe your writers can't earn a living because publishers don't pay them enough. That's something you can actually prove, with real numbers. Instead of sending that 67% statistic to Congress, send it to the heads of the Big 5 and tell them no guild member will sign another contract until they pay more.

Ha! Like that will ever happen.

Despite many publishers’ implementation of anti-piracy software and technological protection measures, the problem continues to grow. 

Do you AG folks know that Apple--the world's biggest music retailer--stopped using DRM on songs in 2009? Because DRM hurts consumers. All this time and money being wasted on lawyers and anti-piracy software and takedown notices could instead be shared with authors in the form of better royalties and higher advances.

This will all be a moot point soon, when digital streaming becomes the norm for ebooks. AFAIK, this topic isn't even on the Authors Guild's radar yet. But they'll get to it in five years, like the luddites they continue to prove they are.

Finally, to complete the fail trifecta, the Authors Guild threw their support behind that nauseatingly awful Authors United letter.

The Authors Guild supports Preston’s actions and endorses his request, as do the American Booksellers Association and the Association of Authors’ Representatives.

Great. Not only the Publisher's Guild is supporting that halfwit, Preston, but so is the Association of Publisher's Representatives.

From the AAR's Canon of Ethics:

the members pledge themselves to loyal service to their clients’ business and artistic needs, and will allow no conflicts of interest that would interfere with such service. 

Hint: Amazon sells more books than any other retailers, and treats writers better than any other publisher. Supporting Preston's half-assed efforts to break up Amazon's imaginary monopoly is the exact definition of conflict of interest.

Fear can make people act stupid. And when your ship is sinking, it's natural to cry for help. It's also natural to feel that the situation is unfair. While frightened, people can lament, do stupid things, and lie to themselves.

These are scary times. Lots of technological disruption. Lots of change. Lots of uncertainty. But being scared isn't an excuse for all of this sloppy thinking, reckless behavior, and abuse of power.

Protecting the status quo isn't forward-thinking. Especially when that status quo harmed more writers than it helped. How about, instead of fighting the future in an increasingly pathetic attempt to return to the old ways, you do yourselves, your clients, and your members a favor and start trying to figure out how to thrive in this new publishing environment?

Me? If I was sinking, I'd start bailing. And repairing my boat. And looking for alternative means of flotation.

Amazon has helped me earn a lot of money. But I don't feel Amazon, or anyone, owes me a living. I'm not envious of authors that outsell me. I'm not angry I never had, and likely never will, have a NYT bestselling book. I don't feel slighted because most ABA members refuse to carry my Amazon published novels. And I certainly wouldn't ever write Congress or the Assistant Attorney General about these things, or support any pinhead who did.

I don't whine. I adapt. I look at the present publishing climate, and try to adjust accordingly, while also keeping my eye on the future.

Blaming Amazon, or piracy, for your sinking sales isn't looking toward the future, or even maximizing the potential of the present. Even if Amazon or piracy were indeed illegally responsible for the implosion of your industry, that horse has left the barn. The digital age is here. Deal with it.

An Authors Guild worth its name would help writers navigate this new publishing terrain, rather than cling desperately to the Old Old Ways. An AAR worth its name wouldn't support actions intended to harm the majority of authors.

But, as I've said repeatedly, this is because the Authors Guild, and the AAR, don't work for authors.

They work for publishers. That's who has been buttering their bread. That's who they serve.

When are we authors going to have a group that actually advocates for us?

You Can Pry My Ebooks From My Cold, Dead Fingers

Recently, I've been blogging about the inevitable dominance of ebooks over dead tree books.

My own experiments show I can make more money selling ebooks than print.

I talked about how Amazon was losing money on Kindle ebooks sold, and envisioned a new publishing system involving estributors.

I refuted some of the common arguments against ebooks.

I predicted what the future of ebooks might be like. And how format is largely the reason we haven't fully embraced ebooks yet.

I considered the new agency model in selling ebooks, and came to the conclusion that publishers seem to care more about selling paper than connecting writers with readers.

I talked about the perception of ownership and the perception of value with print and ebooks.

Barry Eisler put forth a terrific argument about the inevitability of digital dominance.

And finally, I considered the difference between destination value and journey value, and concluded that the sentimental connection people have with print books will likely change, as it is no more compelling than an attachment to any other outdated method of media.

The overwhelming conclusion I've come to is that ebooks will one day be the preferred method of reading. This day is inevitable, and is coming quickly. Print publishers don't seem ready for it, and their methods to delay this eventuality will only lead to annoying their customers, piracy, and alienating their authors.

When I first talked about ebook piracy, I made an argument that cheap sells, free sells even more, and the only way to fight file sharing is with cost and convenience.

The music and movie industries tried to fight piracy, and failed. As a result, companies not previously associated with music and movies have become rich by doing three things.

1. Understanding consumer need.
2. Giving the consumers what they want at a price consumers are willing to pay.
3. Making it as convenient as possible for consumers.

As a result of this, the biggest music player maker and music seller is a computer company, and companies such as Tivo and Netflix, along with services like Direct TV and On Demand, are changing the way people watch movies.

Apple, and the companies that rent TV shows and movies through subscriptions, have discovered something interesting about the media habits of humans.

It used to be thought that we really valued the physical object the media was presented on. As consumers, it was important for us to own VHS and cassette tapes, DVDs and LPs, CDs and BluRay.

And yet, consumers have shown, in greater and greater numbers, that they don't care about the delivery system, and they don't care about ownership of a tangible product. They just want a cheap and easy way to watch the damn movie and listen to the damn song.

Where did this trend begin? When did we start to realize that ownership of an experience didn't require a physical object?

Oddly enough, I think piracy plays a large part in the acceptance and adaptation of new technology.

Let's look at three types of media. Music, movies, and video games.

I've already yakked at length about the many different formats music has had over the years, so I won't recap it here. But when we did fully embrace CDs, it seemed to coincide with the invention of the CD recorder. Being able to share media, ironically, led to the sales of more media.

The RIAA says that the widespread adoption of mp3s lead to more piracy than ever before. But perhaps piracy is what lead to the widespread adoption of mp3s. While music companies tried to block it, Apple created a player for it, and a store to sell the media. Apple looked at what consumers were doing, and responded accordingly.

In the latest video game console wars, is it a coincidence that the only system that has remained hack proof, the PS3, has also sold far fewer units than the hackable Xbox 360 and the Wii? The PSP and Nintendo DS are also hackable, as is the iPhone. All are flourishing.

People like being able to do what they want with their media, and with their media readers. They like to share, and copy, and customize. And as a result, more units, and more media, winds up selling on systems where piracy thrives.

There's a lot of movie and TV show piracy online. But it's a very odd phenomenon. On one hand, there are those who sneak camcorders into films still in the theaters, and upload their copies. There are also those that make 1:1 copies of DVDs and BluRay disks, complete with cover art, so you have a perfect copy of something you'd otherwise pay for.

But, believe it or not, the majority of movie and TV piracy isn't with first run flicks and full DVD copies.

It's with rips and with recent TV shows.

A "rip" is taking a movie and stripping out most of the extra stuff so it's still good quality, but under 700mb (a DVD is normally 4.7 to 8.5 gigabytes.) 700mb fits on a CD, but more often than not, pirates will watch these directly on their computers.

Right after any TV show airs, the torrent sites and file lockers are flooded with people sharing the latest episode of Lost or House or The Biggest Loser.

The conclusion I draw from this isn't that pirates are interested in stealing media. They're more interested in file sharing as a cheap and easy distribution method. You search for what you want. You download it quickly. You experience it.

So along come Tivo, On Demand, Direct TV, and Netflix. What do they do? They allow consumers to experience media cheaply, easily, and quickly. And consumers have embraced these distribution methods to the point where Blockbuster Video--the same dominant force that squeezed out all the mom and pop video stores across the country--is now themselves closing stores left and right.

Consumers have shown us what they want. Ownership of a tangible product is becoming less and less important. Downloading a song, or a movie, or a TV show--either permanently or temporarily through a subscription model--is how many people are deciding to experience media.

I've said before that piracy is human nature. The internet was created to store and share information. It's directly tied to how we communicate. That's why we lend each other blooks and movies, and send emails linking to YouTube videos, and link to each other's blogs and then Tweet the link on Twitter.

How do books play into this? A hardcover book is a luxury item in today's market. It's eight hours of entertainment for $30. That's a month's worth of movies on Netflix, or thirty songs on iTunes. And a paper book is far from an instant delivery system.

If books are going digital, as most seem to predict, the ability to share media, and get it instantly, will help advance the adoption of ebooks by the masses. And as companies like Apple and Netflix and Gamefly (for videogames) have learned, the masses dictate what they're willing to pay for this service.

Not the film producers. Not the music producers. And not the videogame producers.

It's a third party that stepped in, saw the need, and exploited it.

So along comes Amazon. They already have a huge advantage over any other third party. They're the largest online book retailer. It didn't take a huge leap in faith for Jeff Bezos to realize he could also become the biggest online ebook retailer, if they only had an ereader device.

Now the Kindle is the market leader. The technology is only going to become more widespread, more advanced, and cheaper, as time goes on.

Where are the print publishers? Why aren't they making ereaders? Why aren't they allowing for cheap ebook downloads on their websites? Why don't they have customer forums and subscription models? Why are the clinging to an outdated model so tightly that they're now demanding to set both wholesale and retail price of their products?

The videogame industry got it. The PS3, Xbox, PSP, and Wii all allow for downloadable games and online subscription-based play. And guess what? The PS3 finally got hacked. I predict sales will rise as a result.

People want inexpensive media at the press of a button. Books will follow the same model as movies, music, video games, and TV.

It will be an ebook future. A cheap, instant, ebook future.

And we'll embrace it. We always do.

Booty Call

Digital Book World is a two day digital publishing conference recently held in NY. One hot topic at the event was ebook piracy. The conclusions drawn were:

1. People are stealing a lot of ebooks. (surprise surprise!)

2. Publishers need to fight this with lawsuits, better DRM, takedown pressure, anti-piracy legislation, targeting upload sites, and ultimately fighting the pirates themselves.

Apparently, publishing has paid close attention to the music and film industries, who have been successful at stopping pirates with the above tactics.

Oh, wait a second... The RIAA and MPAA have NOT been successful at stopping piracy. In fact, they've done nothing but irritate paying consumers.

It's good to know that the smart folks in publishing are ready to spend millions of dollars to make the same mistakes, no doubt with a similar outcome.

Of course, no one invited me to speak at the conference, which is a shame, because perhaps I could have saved the publishing industry the heartache and financial trouble they're about to embrace with one simple sentence.

The Only Way To Fight Piracy Is With Cost And Convenience.

How do I know this?

Because I've done extensive experiments with ebooks. The cheaper the ebook, the more you sell. And if the ebook is free, the downloads are off the charts.

I also know how pirates think, because I'm a pirate. Yes, I admit to being one of the billion people on the planet who download copyrighted material.

In fact, I've downloaded all of my own ebooks and audiobooks for free from various bit torrent and file locker sites. I'm able to do this because I too am being pirated. A lot.

Google konrath torrent and you get over 14,000 hits. These are all sites where my work is being stolen.

Does it bother me that people are sharing my books online?

No, it doesn't. Because piracy hasn't hurt me financially.

Why is that? Especially since I can account for thousands of illegal downloads of my own material?

Because I'm still making money. I don't think piracy has hurt my sales. In fact, I think it helps my sales by giving me a wider distribution network and greater brand recognition.

My self-pubbed Kindle titles are $1.99 or less. Since last April, I've sold over 20,000 books on Amazon.

Want to hear the funny thing? These same ebooks are available for free on my website. For FREE.

Does free hurt sales? Apparently not.

I've already blogged that if I had the rights to my in-print books, I could make a bigger profit selling them for $1.99 on Kindle than I'm making with the prices my publishers have set.

Cheap sells. Free sells even more. And if you make it easy for people to get your product (like pressing a button on a Kindle or an iPhone) they won't bother going to Pirate Bay or Rapidshare or Limewire or Megaupload or Isohunt.

File sharing is a pain. It can take a long time to download a file. The files can get corrupted. Sometimes they're tough to search. Often you can't find what you want. There are viruses. Seeding files takes up bandwith and harddrive space, and there's always a fear that The Man will send you a letter saying they'll sue you.

How much easier would it be if the large publishers, instead of adding extra copyright protection and hiring a team of lawyers and tech guys and lobbyists to fight piracy, just made their downloads cheaper?

Malls are dying. Main streets are dying. What's taking their place? Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart has shown that if you offer customers inexpensive one-stop shopping, they'll spend money.

iTunes has shown the same thing.

Amazon hasn't been able to do that yet, because publishers insist on DRM (which consumers hate) and high prices for ebooks. $9.99 for a bunch of ones and zeros is overpriced. But if it were up to the publishers, they'd charge $14.99 and more for their ebooks.

Amazon is fighting back, though. In June, they'll begin paying ebook authors a 70% royalty rate.

Let's play the numbers game. Let's say a midlist author, like, oh, JA Konrath, uploads a new Jack Daniels book on Amazon and sells it at $2.99. A coffee at Starbucks costs more than that.

Let's assume JA Konrath can sell 10,000 copies per year of an Amazon title--something he's proven he can do. The 70% royalty rate will mean he earns 20k. PER YEAR. For just the erights.

This is more than most fiction writers earn on a single book for all rights: hard, soft, audio, ebook, movie, and foreign.

Shouldn't publishers try to follow Amazon's example, rather than continuing to charge hardcover prices for ebooks, which have no shipping or production cost?

That's what I'd do. But no one is asking me. No one invited me to speak at Digital Book World.

It's impossible to stop piracy. The whole reason the internet was invented was so people could share and trade information and media.

But it is possible to co-exist with pirates, and make a good living doing so, by making sure ebooks are easily and cheaply available.

Instead, it looks like we're going to see the publishing industry make the same mistakes the music and movie industries have made.

Copyright cannot be successfully defended in a digital world. Period.

Human beings are genetically wired to share information. And the internet has made it easy.

Publishers should be taking advantage of both human nature and the internet. Instead, they're gearing up for a fight they can't win.

Oh, and since I anticipate the comments saying, "If books are free, how can we make money?" I want to restate that authors will be able to make money on free downloads someday.

Let's say a well-known author releases a free ebook. But there's a catch. In the ebook, there are fifteen print ads, like you'd see in a magazine. Each ad costs the advertiser 2 cents per impression, which is comparable to other internet advertising.

That means each free download will earn the author 30 cents.

More than 100,000 people have downloaded my free ebook, SERIAL.

If I'd sold ad space for 2 cents an impression, I'd have earned 30k in less than a year. Even more money than I'd earn selling 10,000 ebooks for $2.99 each.

Of course, I've been saying this for a few years now. And I'll keep saying it until someone finally listens.

I just hope, by the time this is over, there will still be some publishers around to listen.

Ebooks Sales Slowing? Yes and No

Joe sez: This blog originally appeared in 2010. It's extremely prescient about the future of ebooks, but that isn't the reason I'm reposting it.

I'm reposting because I got my very first DMCA Takedown notice.

Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that certain content in your blog is alleged to infringe upon the copyrights of others. As a result, we have reset the post(s) to "draft" status. (If we did not do so, we would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URL(s) of the allegedly infringing post(s) may be found at the end of this message.) This means your post - and any images, links or other content - is not gone. You may edit the post to remove the offending content and republish, at which point the post in question will be visible to your readers again.

Apparently my infringement, according to the website Lumen, was including an Amazon link to author Lexi Revellian.

https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/14128844

Lexi was originally mentioned as one of the laundry list of authors below. I've since removed her name and Amazon link from this post, but this has brought up some interesting points.

1. Linking to an Amazon page is in no way a copyright infringement.

2. I'm pretty sure all authors want as many websites as possible to link to their books.

3. I don't think I know who Lexi is, but this was seven years ago and I may have forgotten. I have no idea why, seven years after the fact, she or someone working on her behalf, would complain to Blogger about a very old fair use post of mine that was supportive of her work.

I know that some authors hire companies to scour the Internet for examples of piracy. These companies dish out DMCA notices like drunks throw out beads at Mardi Gras.

As mentioned by Blogger in the email above, they remove posts regardless of merit. Which means anyone can accuse anyone of copyright infringement, and Blogger (along with many other Internet companies) err to the side of the accuser.

Certainly everyone can see what a bad thing this is. Guilty until proven innocent didn't work for the court system, and it shouldn't work for the Internet.

4. I have no idea if Lexi is using any services to protect her copyrights, because I have no idea why I got this notice. But I will offer some blanket advice to all authors who think about using one of these services:

Piracy doesn't harm authors. I have written ample posts about this topic.

Hiring companies to police the Internet, looking for evidence of copyright infringement and sending out DCMA notices, does hurt authors. Lexi had an Amazon link to her website, that even seven years later still gets traffic. Now her link is gone. That can't be helpful for an author. And I can guess I'm not the only blogger who is getting notices like this. How many writers, thinking they're combating piracy, are actually limiting their own reach?

Probably a lot. So I'll say it again:

It's a waste of time, and money, and also potentially career-damaging, to fight piracy. I say this as someone who has been pirated a lot for over a decade. People pirate me. And I don't care. And there is absolutely no verifiable evidence that ebook piracy harms authors.

If you're concerned about piracy, make sure your ebooks and audio are easily available and affordable.

But, as I said, you shouldn't be concerned. People are going to share files. It's part of the human condition. Anti-piracy laws are about as successful as anti-drug laws.

The enemy is obscurity, not people reading your work for free.

Now here's the original December 2010 blog post:

Am I the only one who noticed this from Publishers Weekly?

"Facing some harder comparisons, e-book sales posted their slowest growth rates in 2010 in October. Still, sales jumped 112.4%, to $40.7 million, from the 14 publishers who reported results to the AAP’s monthly sales program."

The article is HERE.

Now, a few things struck me when I read this.

First, probably because I'm a writer and have an overactive imagination, I pictured editors in NY clinking champagne glasses with the toast, "The ebook bubble is bursting, thank Gutenberg, and soon we'll be able to get back to what we do best; selling paper."

I realize that reporters and writers of the news have to attribute meaning to numbers, and that hooks and spin are necessary to make facts interesting. But the way PW prefaced these numbers, and called the article "E-Book Growth Slows" gives me a pretty good idea what their focus is. PW serves the publishing industry. The publishing industry is very uncomfortable about ebooks. Here's a nice fact to ease the publishing industry's collective mind.

Except it's a myopic, self-absorbed, and flat-out misleading fact.

This shows that ebook growth has slowed for 14 REPORTING PUBLISHERS.

That doesn't mean ebook growth is slowing for Amazon, B&N, Smashwords, or the tens of thousands of indie authors self-publishing.

My numbers have been steadily climbing for 21 months, and in the last six weeks I made $26,000.

Yesterday, I mentioned Amanda Hocking, who is selling 1200 ebooks a day.

In the past, this blog has mentioned Zoe Winters, Karen McQuestion, and Selena Kitt. Selena Kitt made $120,000 this year on her Kindle ebooks.

But these are all outliers, right?

No, they're not.

Mark Coker, who runs Smashwords, recently interviewed his star author Brian Pratt on HuffPo. Brian has earned $25,000 in three months.

If you check over on Kindleboards, Michael Sullivan sold 7500 ebooks in November. The thread also lists 14 other authors who sold more than 1000 ebooks last month.

Here are the names of these authors. Keep an eye on them. I only expect their sales to go up.

David McAfee
Nathan Lowell
Ellen Fisher
Valmore Daniels
David Dalglish
Terri Reid
Victorine Lieske
Richard Jackson
Karen Cantwell
Margaret Lake
HP Mallory
KA Thompson
Beth Orsoff
Tina Folsom
Bella Andre
Ty Johnson
Vicki Tyley
Marilyn Lee
Felicity Heaton
LJ Sellers
Jeremy Bishop

PW or AAP didn't poll any of these writers and ask if their growth was slowing down. They certainly didn't ask me.

And these authors I listed aren't the only ones with growing sales--I'm just too lazy to gather more info. If you're an indie author who sold more than 1000 ebooks in November, post in the comments section and I'll add you to the list.

But then, indie sales don't amount to much, right? After all, 1000 ebooks a month isn't a lot. Not compared to what Big NY Publishing does.

Actually...

Whiskey Sour, by all counts my highest selling and most successful books, has sold 60,000 copies since 2004. That means it has averaged 770 copies a month since its debut.

1000 copies a month seems pretty damn good to me.

But then, these are indie authors. It's not like there are any professional authors jumping on this Kindle bandwagon. Except for maybe:

Robert W. Walker
David Morrell
Raymond Benson
Libby Fischer Hellmann
Blake Crouch
F. Paul Wilson
Marcus Sakey
James Swain
Paul Levine
William Meikle
Scott Nicholson
Simon Wood
Parnell Hall
Joseph Nassise
Tom Schreck
Henry Perez
Jeff Strand
Lee Goldberg
Mark Terry
Harry Shannon
Richard S. Wheeler
Ruth Harris
Don Pendleton
Jeremy Robinson

There are many more, but I'm tired off adding all the links.

However, I do want to post this final one, because I think it's pretty damn cool.

This is the latest book by bestselling author LA Banks.

I met Leslie at a writing convention in New Orleans, and we traded stories about how we'd gotten screwed in our careers, which lead to me talking about ebooks.

If you look at the cover (designed by my cover artist, Carl Graves at Extended Imagery), you'd think this is her newest Big NY Print Release.

Nope. Ms. Banks is self-pubbing this one, just in time for Xmas, for $3.99. You can buy it on Kindle HERE.

So... perhaps there is a reason ebook sales are slowing for those 14 publishers mentioned in PW.

Perhaps sales are slowing because more readers are buying indie books. Or because more professional writers are going indie. Or because publishers are too self-absorbed to notice anything happening outside of the insular world they've built for themselves.

But what do I know? I'm an outlier.

Here's a fun game, though. You know the Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon meme? We can also play the Six Degrees of JA Konrath with self-pubbed Kindle authors.

Of the names I listed in the blog, I'm one degree of separation from at least 80% of them. The rest, I'm probably second degree.

You hear that, NY Publishing? You truly want to slow the growth of ebooks?

Shut me up.

I'm willing to be bought off. Pass around a collection envelope, like you do for employee birthdays. For a million bucks, I promise I'll never blog about ebooks, or help another writer, ever again.

Here's my Paypal button. Maybe we can do business.

Should E-Books Be Cheap?

Let's look at a recent Time Magazine article about the Amazon Kindle.

Here are the two things I picked out:

First, Amazon is selling ebooks at $9.99 for Kindle, and is taking a loss on this because publishers are charging them standard hardcover rates.

Second, according to small press publisher Dennis Johnson, nobody can make a book that sells for $9.99. You can save on shipping and printing, but that's only a small fraction of what it costs to make a book.

Now, at the risk of annoying print publishers everywhere--and print publishers have been very good to me and I consider myself grateful to have worked with some wonderful publishers--I'm going to politely disagree with the above statements.

The music industry, for all who have been paying attention, has never recovered from the digital mp3 revolution. I doubt the skewed tales of loss from the RIAA are accurate, but I have heard that iTunes is now selling more music than the Walmart, the world's largest music retailer. I also know, anecdotally, that my friends with iPods have managed to fill them with music, and very little of this music was bought. Rather it was borrowed, shared, or stolen.

There are several causes for the profits being down in the music industry. CDs cost too much money, especially when consumers often only wanted one or two songs on a disc. iPods and digital equipment have replaced stereos as the preferred method of music delivery. When fans set up distribution networks, like Napster, to share music, the RIAA tried to shut down these networks rather than learn to use the new technology to their advantage.

Apple finally figured out that 99 cent songs and no DRM is the way to go. But it took them way too long to get to that point, and as a result, we have a healthy, active piracy community. In fact, 13 of the top 100 most visited websites are file sharing sites, and that doesn't include Usenet, Limewire, or eMule.

So let's recap on the things the music industry did wrong.

1. High price.
2. Not adapting to the new method of delivery.
3. Not adequately dealing with piracy.

Hmm. Now if we look at what publishers are doing, we can draw some parallels.

First, in this economy, $27.95 is too much for a hardcover work of fiction. Why do they cost this much?

I've done other posts about the cost of books, and why publishing uses an archaic business model. To recap:

1. Only one out of five books makes a profit (two break even, two lose money.)

2. A fifty percent sell through (books printed vs. books actually sold) is considered by many to be the industry average.

3. The books that don't sell are remaindered (sold at a loss) or destroyed.

4. Retailers take books at a 40% to 60% discount. (we'll include the distributor cut in here as well.)

5. The author earns between 10% and 15% of the cover price.

6. Printing and shipping and corrugation (making boxes and displays) can cost 10% or more of the cover price, depending on the number of returns.

7. Marketing, advertising, and coop all are factored in to P&L.

8. Books have certain set up costs; typesetting, line editing, artwork, etc.

9. That means a publisher earns perhaps 15% to 20% of a book's cover price, and they have to run their entire company on this small amount.

So it seems that maybe it is impossible for publishers to lower their prices.

And yet...

No printing, no shipping, and no distribution (warehousing) costs, along with no returns, actually can save a big chunk of money. The way these costs are broken down make it seem like this is a very small part of a book's price. But, in fact, these are the only set costs, and these are the costs that all other costs are based on.

All the other costs are negotiable.

Publishers make money on paperbacks, which sell for $6.99 to $10.99. So it isn't about price, it's about profit per unit.

Print publishers are basing ebook prices on the profit per unit figures of print books. They have to do this, because if they sell ebooks for less and don't make up for the loss in volume, they will lose money.

But if a major publisher switched completely to ebooks (which may be what the future holds) a new pricing and profit structure will evolve. Costs to the publisher will be much less, and the cost of running a company will be much less.

When the cost of printing, shipping, and warehousing is eliminated, a lot of jobs are eliminated. This saves money.

When the cost of returns no longer figures into a book's profit margin, this saves money.

When books no longer go out of print, this earns money. In fact, every book, rather than one out of five, can be profitable.

When gigantic marketing and advertising budgets aimed at moving print books are slashed, this saves money.

No coop in bookstores, no author book tours. This saves money.

"But what about author advances?" publishers may ask. Tell you what--double my royalty rate for ebooks, I won't take an advance.

What we actually have isn't a situation where ebooks cost as much as print books. It's a situation where publishers must charge the same for ebooks as they do with print books if they want to keep their infrastructures intact.

But the fact is, consumers don't care about publishers, or their infrastructures. They care about books. And they want to pay less for ebooks.

They also want to be able to get ebooks without copy protection, just like they want their songs without copy protection. ITunes dropped DRM because their customers hated it. Will publishing adopt a similar stance?

I just got this newsletter from a large publisher:

We have engaged Attributor, a leading anti-piracy protection service, to monitor the web for instances of unlawful use of its authors’ books and content.

How much do you think that is going to add to the cost of ebooks? And how well do you think it will work, considering DRM and Macrovision and RIAA lawsuits and every other form of anti-piracy protection has failed miserably? And of course, Attributor will be used in conjunction with DRM.

I'd love to see Attributor take on Usenet, which has billions of illegal downloads per day and no way to track them. Or Rapidshare, which is based on password-protected private uploads and downloads using encrypted file lockers. Or any torrent tracker, for that matter. Pirate Bay and Mininova have been sued a gazillion times to no effect. And the private trackers are invite-only---good luck Attributor in getting an invitation.

Do you really want to know how to get rid of piracy? Here's how:

The rules of supply and demand don't work in a digital world, because the supply is unlimited. You don't fight piracy with weapons. You fight piracy with cost and convenience.

Let me state that again, because no one seems to get it.

The rules of supply and demand don't work in a digital world, because the supply is unlimited. You don't fight piracy with weapons. You fight piracy with cost and convenience.

If there were a central hub, where you could easily search for ebooks and get them at a reasonable price, there would be no need to pirate books.

Amazon is not that central hub. The Kindle is too expensive, their ebooks are too expensive, and the Kindle uses DRM and a proprietary format that is difficult to convert. Proprietary exclusive formats don't work. That's why Betamax and DAT failed.

Publishers, if they truly were looking toward the future, would make themselves into these hubs, eliminating the need for Amazon. But they're still focused on dead trees.

Here are some possible future scenarios:

--Publishers learn from the mistakes made by the music industry regarding digital content, and lower the prices for digital books. This could result in more inexpensive digital books than expensive print books being sold, leading to a decline in print sales, and an overall drop in the gross profit of the industry, even if there are a greater number of books sold. But they would survive, and after restructuring, possibly thrive.

--Publishers keep the price of digital books high, in which case more and more people boycott expensive books and support newer and cheaper authors. Readers also begin to illegally download books in larger numbers, as they do with music. Publishing dies.

The goal is to figure out what readers are willing to pay for the ease of downloading a book at a central distribution hub. Will they pay $5.99? Will a percentage of them buy it from another site for $2.99 and then convert it to their desired format themselves? Or will some of them just pirate it?

--Publishers realize their business model is based on printing and distribution, and they radically alter their companies in order to succeed in a digital world. That means becoming their own stores/distributors like Amazon, offering exclusive content.

Wal-mart has proven that “one stop shopping” is what America wants. Why go to a mall, with 50 stores, when one store carries everything from milk to tires to pants to books?

And yet, Green Day didn’t release their latest CD with Wal-mart, and it was still a smash hit. People will go elsewhere for exclusive content if they want it bad enough.

If I were a publisher, I’d consider what books I have under contract, and figure out how to sell them without splitting the money with a distributor/retailer such as Amazon.

--Authors realize that they don’t need publishers. Why should they split revenue with a publisher when they can upload it to the world themselves?

Currently, I'm making $110 a day on books NY publishing didn't want. That's not a lot of money, yet. But the average advance for a novel is still $5000. Between April 8 and June 30, I'll have earned $5000. And my numbers are going up.

--Amazon realizes it doesn’t need publishers, and deals directly with authors. They've already begun publishing print titles, and they've allowed for authors to publish print and ebook titles on their own. Eventually, Amazon is going to start getting some big download numbers for their ebooks, and they'll approach a big author with an exclusive royalty deal.

--A third party ereader is created by a company to compete with the Kindle. It will be inexpensive, able to read a variety of ebook formats, and have upgradable software and memory. This will lead to ereaders becoming as commonplace as iPods, and be the beginning of the end of print.

--Ebooks will become multi-media experiences like DVDs. Books will have author annotations and interviews, be bundled with audio versions, and contain extras such as short stories, early drafts, dictionaries and glossaries, and be directly linkable to forum discussions and book groups. Who would still want paper?

There's a lot to consider when it comes to e-book and the future of publishing. And I may be dead wrong on a lot of these predictions. Hell, I may not know what I'm talking about. Even with the economy, and bookstores losing money, and revenue down, publishers are still alive and kicking, just like they have been for hundreds of years.

But I do think e-books are the future. And I don't think print publishers know how to handle that.

There was a recent announcement that Simon & Schuster was joining forces with Scribd, an ebook download hub, and offering their catalog of ebooks for 20% off print cover price.

I wish S&S much success, but I don't predict it. 20% off the print price is a insignificant discount. Maybe if they slashed prices to a few dollars each title it would catch on, but I don't believe Scribd is a big enough hub yet, and it doesn't get nearly the traffic Amazon does.

But because I'm a cutting edge early adopter who can predict trends (ask Barry Eisler), I offered my ebooks on Scribd 15 days ago, at the same price they are available for on Kindle, less than $2 each.

In 15 days, I've sold zero books. Compare this to over a hundred books a day I sell on Amazon.

Scribd is not the future of epublishing.

If I were Simon & Schuster, or any big publisher, I would digitize my entire backlist and sell it on my publisher website for $2.99 a book, splitting royalties 50/50 with the author, and advertising the hell out of it in print, radio, and TV. Scribd, Amazon, and other e-tailers could have the titles for slightly more, factoring in their mark-up.

I would also invest heavily in new ebook reader technology, perhaps partnering with Apple or Google or Sony, to make a cheap, better competitor to the Kindle.

But I don't predict either happening anytime soon. Publishers, like oil tankers, take a long time to change direction. That doesn't mean publishers aren't smart--they're some of the smartest folks I know. But being smart, and being willing to scrap a business model you've used for fifty years, are two different things.

It will be interesting to see what the future holds. But as an author, I'm emboldened that with enough titles under my belt, in the future I might actually be able earn a living uploading my own books digitally, rather than depending on someone else to sell my books for me.

And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who believes this.

Steal This Ebook

Let's run an experiment and see if piracy is harmful to sales.

I'm currently selling my ebook JACK DANIELS STORIES for $2.99 on Kindle and Barnes and Noble. Here's the description:

JA Konrath, known for the Jacqueline "Jack" Daniels thrillers set in Chicago, offers this collection of short stories and novellas from the Jack Daniels universe.

Join Jack Daniels, her partner Herb Benedict, private eye Harry McGlade, and part-time criminal Phineas Troutt, in this omnibus of 15 stories.

On the Rocks - Suicide or murder? Lt. Jack Daniels solves a locked room mystery.

Whelp Wanted - P.I. Harry McGlade becomes a dognapper in order to stop a dognapper, or something like that.

Street Music - Phineas Troutt hunts a prostitute through the dangerous streets of Chicago. Are his intentions pure?

The One That Got Away - The Gingerbread Man (the villain from WHISKEY SOUR) hunts one final victim.

With a Twist - It looked like the man fell from a great height, but the body is in his living room. Jack Daniels solves another impossible crime.

Epitaph - Phin Troutt takes on a Chicago street gang with vengeance on his mind.

Taken to the Cleaners - Harry McGlade tries to solve a difficult mystery, but mostly just goofs off.

Body Shots - Jack Daniels faces her most challenging case yet; a school shooting. But does she know more about the perp than she realizes?

Suffer - Phineas Troutt has taken some questionable jobs, but will he murder a man's wife?

School Daze - P.I. Harry McGlade investigates a private school, but he's not entirely sure why.

Overproof - While shopping on the Gold Coast, Jack Daniels notices traffic has come to a stand-still. When she realizes what the problem is, she's confronted with her own mortality, and the possible deaths of hundreds.

Bereavement - How badly does Phineas Troutt need a fix? What is he willing to do?

Pot Shot - Detective Herb Benedict just wants a home cooked meal. But his plans get interrupted by a very determined sniper.

Last Request - Phineas Troutt picks up a hitchhiker, with deadly results.

The Necro File - Harry McGlade investigates some bizarre murders in this hilarious, gore-filled mini-epic. (Author's note: This is easily the funniest thing I've ever written, but it's also very offensive. Let the reader beware...)

That's about 65,000 words of Jack Daniels and friends. Some of these are laugh out loud funny. Some require you to solve the mystery. Some are thrilling. Some are scary. All of them have been previously published in various magazines and anthologies.

------------------------

Currently, on May 30 at 7:00pm, this ebook is ranked at #2009 on Amazon. It sold about 315 copies in the month of May.

It is ranked at #44,480 on Barnes & Noble.

So let's try an experiment. Here are some ways for you to obtain a copy of this ebook.

Click HERE to download a free zip file of JACK DANIELS STORIES. It contains versions in html, pdf, doc, epub, and prc (for Kindle). So no matter what ereader or computer or smart phone you own, you should be able to read it or convert it. That's the tracker link. If it isn't working, here's the direct link: http://www.jakonrath.com/Jack.zip

Or, if you own a Kindle, you can click HERE to go to the Kindle store and buy it for $2.99.

Or, if you own a Nook, you can click HERE and go to Barnes and Noble and buy it for $2.99.

If you download the free version, and feel the overwhelming need to donate $1.99 (or any amount) to me, you can click HERE and go to Paypal to donate. Paypal is free to join, safe, and easy to use.

I'll keep track of my free downloads, Kindle numbers, Paypal donations, and my rankings on Amazon and B&N for the next 30 days, then post the results.

Also, I encourage pirates to post this everywhere. Go ahead and proliferate the internet with JACK DANIELS STORIES. You can explain that I'm encouraging it, or you can just take it and not say a word. I'd appreciate it if you post in the comments section where you're uploaded it, which you can do anonymously. Or you don't have to.

If anyone sees this ebook on file sharing sites, I also ask that you please post a link to it in the comments. The more places I can see this being shared, the better I can compare ebooks sold to ebooks shared.

Will giving the ebook away for free hurt sales? Will it help sales? Will I gain readers? Will people donate money? Will people who take the free ebook buy my other ebooks?

What do you think will happen?

Should be interesting. Now some Q & A.

Q: Why are you doing this?

A: I've said repeatedly that there is no proof piracy hurts sales. So I'm manning up and putting my money where my mouth is.

Q: How long will you run this experiment?

A: I'm going to keep track of it for a month. But the links will be live forever. I fully expect the ebook to appear on file sharing sites forever as well.

Q: Do you have any predictions?

A: I have no idea what will happen. It depends on how many people see this post and act on it. But I really don't expect my sales to drop off.

Q: If you're so pro-piracy, why don't you give away all of your ebooks?

A: My stance has always been that I don't believe piracy is harmful to the artist, and that it can't be stopped, so don't worry about it. Does that make me pro-piracy? Or does it make me realistic?

Q: You didn't answer the question.

A: The majority of my ebooks are currently free on my website, www.JAKonrath.com. If you want them for free, there they are.

Q: Why did you use this particular ebook for your experiment?

A: I think it's a good cross-section of my work, and will appeal to the widest range of people. It also has modest sales, which should be easier to track.

Q: I clicked on the free download. Now what am I supposed to do with it?

A: Save it to your computer, then open it using Winzip. You can download Winzip HERE. It's free for the first 45 days.

Q: What if the ebook is downloaded for free 10,000 times and no one pays for it?

A: That would be awesome. I hope those people who download it take the time to read a few stories. As a wise man once said, writers should fear obscurity, not piracy.

Q: What if your sales drop off to nothing?

A: Want to bet they don't? :)

Q: Can I give away this ebook on my blog and website?

A: The goal here is to share it by any and all means possible. Link to it, copy it, upload it, make torrents, put it on Usenet, stick it in file lockers, etc. Whatever you'd like.

Q: You're encouraging people to steal, condoning piracy, and turning your back on your fellow authors. You're the devil.

A: I get that a lot. No one is forcing you to read my blog. If you don't like what I'm doing, change the channel.

Addendum:

Lots of disagreement in the comments. That's good. Disagreement is the pathway to discussion and understanding, as long as everyone keeps an open mind.

Some points I'm seeing repeated:

1. This experiment doesn't count. Because I'm giving permission, this isn't "stealing."

JA sez: For the nth time, I don't care what the legal or moral definition of file-sharing is. I want to see if free books, widely distributed, cannibalize book sales. That's the test.

2. The final stats will be inconclusive.

JA sez: I agree. The whole reason it is impossible to prove piracy is harmful is that there is no direct association or causality between people getting free books and books for sale. There are too many other factors at play. That said, if my sales don't drop off, that's a promising indicator that free books don't effect sales.

3. If a person takes the free ebook, you've lost a sale.

JA sez: Actually, the opposite is true. If a free option is available right next to a paid option, and people take the freebie, that PROVES they wouldn't have bought the one for sale because they took the freebie.

4. You pay a cover artist but don't expect to get paid yourself?

JA sez: I hope to get paid. I'm doing everything within my power to give readers good, inexpensive ebooks. But I also know that some people will get copies for free. I see no reason to fight this. It isn't going to stop, and I don't believe it hurts sales.

5. Why not just make everything free?

JA sez: There's a big difference between giving away everything for free and tolerating media file-sharing. If you don't see that difference, I doubt I'll be able to convince you.

6. What about the future where everything is free?

JA sez: Everything will be free in the future, eh? How about using that crystal ball to get the lottery numbers for next week.

7. You're getting publicity for this. That will fuel sales. Pirates may just buy your book just to prove that file-sharing doesn't hurt.

JA sez: So now I have to figure out who is buying my ebooks and what their intent is? Now I can't use publicity to fuel sales, as I've been doing in the past?

Bottom line: there are versions that are free, and versions that are for sale. Will the free versions slow down the sales trajectory I've been on with this ebook (selling about 10 copies per day)? To my knowledge, this ebook has not been pirated before, so I'm taking a book with proven sales and adding the free factor to it. Why don't we all take a deep breath and actually wait and see what happens?

I believe the majority of piracy exists because copyright holders are unable or unwilling to meet specific consumer demand, such as availability, price, and convenience.

To see the tracked free downloads so far, click HERE.

Time to Reform Copyright

In 1787 the Philadelphia Convention took place between May and September, to address problems in the newly formed USA. The result was the Consitituion, which included Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

From this clause came US copyright law. 

Almost 100 years later, in 1886, the Berne Convention required its signatories to accept copyright or works from other signatory countries. The USA didn't sign it because Berne stated that an inventor or writer automatically owned the rights to their creation, whereas US law said the work must be registered to be protected, via copyright or patent. The US also wasn't in agreement with Berne on moral rights.

Then came the Buenos Aires Convention, which was an alternative to Berne that the USA did sign, and then the Universal Copyright Convention in 1952, which expanded on the Buenos Aires Convention.

The US finally become a  Berne signatory in 1989 with the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988.

The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights came in 1994. The US signed in 1995. It included this:

National exceptions to copyright (such as "fair use" in the United States) are constrained by the Berne three-step test.

The first two steps of the three-step test are:

Right of Reproduction: (1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form. (2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

Next came the WIPO Copyright Treaty in 1996 which was implemented in US law by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. Besides protecting the copyright holder from unauthorized reporduction of their work, it also criminalzed production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM) that control access to copyrighted works.

Now, before I get into my feelings about what all of this means, I want to say that I did most of the above research on Wikipedia, and even cribbed most of my final sentence verbatim from the Wikipedia DMCA page. It could be argued that my blantant plagiarism is fair use, but happily I don't need to argue that, because Wikipedia has a Creative Commons License. I don't violate any copyright by copying Wikipedia enteries because they allow it.

Got all that?

So, according to US law, if I write something original, I own that work and own the rights to reproduce and exploit that work.

I cannot copy the works of others unless I get their permission.

I cannot sell the works of others unless I get their permission.

I cannot jailbreak the devices I own (or write programs that allow people to jailbreak their devices).

I cannot plagiarise. 

I cannot strip DRM from works I legally obained.

I can own an online service provider where users can violate the Berne Act and DMCA.

Hmm. Things seem to be getting sort of confusing. So I can buy a paper book, let all of my friends borrow it, then resell it on eBay, and that's perfectly legal according to the first sale doctrine. But I can't lend my ebooks to my friends or my mom without getting the author's permission, and I can't jailbreak my phone or PS3, and I can't strip DRM from ebooks I paid for.

Can I post images I find on the Internet on this blog, like the one above?

Not without permsission. (In the case of the above image of the copyright page, I downloaded it from www.morguefile.com which allows people to copy their free images.)

Can I make copies of songs I own? Yes, I'm allowed to make back-ups, but only if I retain the hard copy of the original. If I ever sell a CD I ripped, the mp3s I own are illegal. Ditto with DVDs. But I can record movies off of TV and put them on DVD for personal use, and I can record songs off the radio legally.

Is it me, or are things becoming sort of cloudy, if not convolted? 

Don't think so? Think this is a simple black and white issue?

Answer these questions:

Have you ever recorded a TV show? That's legal.
Have you ever downloaded a TV show from a filesharing sight that aired last night because you missed it and forgot to record it? That's illegal.

Have you ever found an image on the Internet and put it on your blog without permission? That's illegal.

Have you ever borrowed a book from the library? That's legal.

Have you ever burned a friend's CD? That's illegal.

Have you ever bought a used video game? That's legal.

Have you ever downloaded a videogame without permission from the copyright holder? That's illegal, even if the game is out of print and unavailable for sale.

Do you allow people to lend your ebooks via the Kindle Book Lending feature? That's legal.

Do you use DRM on your ebook titles? That's legal.

Have you ever stripped DRM from an ebook title? That's illegal.

Have you ever jailbroken a device? That's illegal.

Have you ever heard a parody song? That's legal.

Have you written fan fiction? That could be illegal.

Have you every watched a cable TV show at a friend's house? That's legal.

Can you sell ebooks and mp3 songs you don't want anymore? That's illegal.

Have you ever listened to a live band that played cover songs? That's legal.
Have you ever brought a recording device into a concert? That's illegal.

Lot's of gray there, huh?

Here's what I perceive the primary problem with current aspects of US copyright law is: it punishes the consumer and has no proven advantage for the copyright holder.

The world is changing. With the advent of digital media, ebooks can be reproduced indefinitely for zero cost, and destributed for near zero cost.

People are consistenly and routinely breaking copyright laws with no measurable impact on the artist.

People want to be able to do whatever they want with the stuff they buy. They don't want restrictions.

People increasingly treat information and entertainment as attainable for cheap or free.

Stealing something digital does not equate a lost sale.

The problem isn't piracy. It's discoverablilty.

Suing people for filesharing is ineffective. 

Closing filesharing websites is ineffective.

Restricting digital media is impossible. 

Rights holders who don't make their IPs easily available, via fair cost and convenience, are asking to be pirated.

Open source always beats closed source in the long run, even with current copyright law.

DRM gets broken all the time.

Billions of files are shared daily.

Jailbreaking, modding, homebrewing, sampling, remixing, and fan fiction (among other activities) are always going to happen because that's what human beings do.

We're a species that uploads Vines and Harlem Shake videos to YouTube. We make mix tapes. We install Linux on our PCs. We post anonymous stories where Spock nails Harry Potter. We tweet links and pics. We mod Donkey Kong so Mario is naked. We have the majesty that is Beatallica. We share our digital information and entertainment. And I think all of that is good.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a judge. But I see a problem in the Berne three-step test. To reiterate:

Right of Reproduction: (1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form. (2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

I'm reading a conflict between steps 1 and 2. Because I don't think the free reproduction and distribution of my work conflicts with my ability to exploit my work. Anyone can get my ebooks for free, yet I still sell well. My legitimate interests are protected, even with abundant piracy.

Here's what I think the extent of copyright law should be:

Authors of literary and artistic works shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form, for the purpose of financial exploitation, for the term of the author's lifetime.

If anyone wants to copy it, or share it, they're free to as long as they aren't doing it to make money. Only the artist (or those the artist assigns rights to) can monetaily benefit from an IP. 

Some might argue that such a thing would seriously impair an artist's ability to make money. If every ebook on Amazon.com for $$$ was available on a mirrorite PirateAmazon.com for free, wouldn't everyone use PirateAmazon.com?

I don't think so. Some readers only get free ebooks on Amazon.com, and never pay for anything. Others go to libraries. Others buy used books. And just about every ebook available on Amazon.com is already available on filesharing sites. Yet many writers, me included, still manage to make decent money, even though all of my books are freely available, both legally and illegally.

The fear of piracy is an irrational fear. I don't know of any reputable study that shows piracy hurts sales.

Trying to restrict and control information and entertainment is short-sighted. Eventually everything can be gotten for free. No one can stop that from happening. As soon as you create something and post it on the World Wide Web, the genie is out of the bottle and not ever going back in. And as much as you stamp your feet and say, "That's not fair! I'm the copyright holder!" it's not going to stop it. The DMCA isn't going to stop it. DRM isn't going to stop it. Stronger copyright laws won't stop it. 

Irritating fans is going to hurt you, not help you. And worrying about people stealing your IP is time better spent worrying about something you have more control over, like the weather.

It's human nature to share. Because we share we have wonderful things like YouTube and Wikipedia. We have Bittersweet Symphony. We have My Sweet Lord. Like it or not, we have Fifty Shades of Grey. What if Monet had been able to copyright the Impressionist Movement so no one else could try it? What if Hume required a license before anyone could teach Empiricism? What if Faraday had patented his homopolar motor and dynamo instead of allowing others to use them freely, resulting in electric motors and generators?

I'm a thriller writer today because I was influenced by thriller writers I read for free at the library, or bought used because I was poor. I don't believe Ed McBain or Robert B. Parker ever made a dime off of me, but they shaped the way I write and what I write about.

Hopefully, somewhere, my books are influencing some new writer. And I don't care if she got them off of Demonoid. 

I believe one of the most authentic and meaningful political movements in the last hundred years is the Pirate Party. Their logo is on the left. I didn't ask for permission to use it, but I'm guessing they'll be okay with that.

The Pirate Party supports civil rights, direct democracy and participation in government, open content, information privacy, transparency, freedom of information, and net neutrality. They oppose censorship and warrantless surveillance. 

All good things, right?

They also support the reform of copyright and patent laws. And I believe they are just as right about that as they are about everything else I just listed.

You can't police the Internet without trampling on rights and restricting freedoms. No one should even be trying to.

Q: But Joe, that's insane! How will authors make money if everything is free?

A: I just incorporated a business that will do just that: pay the artist while the content is free. More soon.

Q: But the Pirate Party believes copyright should only last five years! That's too little!

A: How do you know that's too little unless we try it and see what happens? Personally, I'd prefer a longer copyright. I propose the lifetime of the author. But I wouldn't say no to 30 years. Walk Disney is long dead. Why should his heirs and company continue to make money off of Mickey Mouse? What did they do to earn it? What if we still had to pay Shakespeare's estate to perform his plays? Would he still be the most popular writer in history?

Q: If you're so gung-ho about free, why don't you make everything you write free?

A: At one point or another everything I write has been free, using Amazon promotions. I'm also widely pirated. If someone wants to find my work for free, they can Google it easily.

Q: But are't you losing money when you get pirated?

A: I don't see how. When I was looking for an image to use on this blog, I looked for free images. I wasn't in the market to buy an image (like I do for my book covers). No photographer, anywhere, was going to get any money out of me for a copyright page picture. I was going to keep looking until I found something free.

That's what many pirates do. They download things they wouldn't have ever bought. Or things they are unable to buy because they are too expensive, out of print, or unavailable.

I used to download TV shows like Through the Wormhole via bit torrent, because if I missed an episode there was no way to watch it otherwise. Now I just download them for $1.99 an episode on Amazon. It's easier and faster, and the price is right.

If all copyright holders allowed for fast, easy, cheap downloads, I bet they'd make more money. But what the hell do I know? I'm just a guy who made his backlist downloads fast, easy, and cheap...

Q: Why are you even blogging about this?

A: Because in the past week I was spammed twice by services advertising "help" for authors removing their ebooks from pirate websites, and I also got a copyright registration in the mail for one of my Amazon published books and thought, "Why the hell do I need this? What a waste of time, money, and common sense."

It's 2014. Establishing authorship is as easy as Googling. And the only entities who benefit from DRM and anti-piracy services are those selling DRM and anti-piracy services.

Paranoia is ugly. Get over it.

Q: Wasn't your last blog about keeping old titles visible? Isn't that the opposite of saying people can steal them?

A: If my ebooks became the most pirated ebooks on the Internet, I bet my income would go way up. I should be so lucky.

Q: I think you're just being intentionally provactive for link bait.

A: I don't need link bait, because I don't think fans read this blog. This blog is for writers. And I believe writers would be doing themselves a big favor if they stopped worrying about piracy.

You hear that. Roxana Robinson? When Scott Turow was president of the Authors Guild, he wasted a lot of time, money, and hot air ineffectively trying to combat piracy. Now that you're president, how about you do something worthwhile? Like affordable health insurance for members? Or having members boycott publishers who refuse to raise ebook royalties?

Piracy can't be stopped. And I don't believe it should be stopped. This belief is growing, and will continue to grow until laws are changed. And they will be.

You can't win when it runs contrary to what most people want.

And for the record, even though I shouldn't need to say this, anyone is welcome to repost this entire blog entry--and my entire blog for that matter--for free anywhere they'd like.