David Flanagan (JavaScript Definitive Guide author) on piracy
davidflanagan.com
davidflanagan.com
What I didn't find:
1. A single piece of data, even of the anecdotal variety, that piracy is responsible for his declining royalties. By his own admission: he doesn't know and there are other trends that might explain decline in print sales.
2. A description of how he tried to find new ways of making money in the world of declining dead-trees sales.
I've bought several technical, self-published books as PDFs. I believe some people (e.g. HN regular Amy Hoy) make decent money doing that. Has the author tried that? No.
I bough 30+ books on my kindle. Did the author try to self-publish on kindle in order to get higher royalties (70% vs., say, 15% from print) hence more revenue (even with lower price)? No.
His books would be perfect for such an experiment because he already has an audience thanks to 4 popular books he wrote in the past.
http://torrentfreak.com/google-starts-censoring-bittorrent-r...
Essentially every page on the internet contains copyrighted material. Which pages contain copyright infringing material is another matter entirely. Because copyright is based on permission, you have to know who has given whom permission to do what, and that data simply isn't available. You can guess, but if third parties became legally liable for being wrong, things would get ugly fast.
For example, just the other day, the book "Basics of Compiler Design" was up on HN. The authors are giving a PDF of it away for personal use and at-cost reprinting. If one naively assumed that everyone giving away PDFs of published books was some sort of evil pirate, they'd have been banned from Google for their generosity.
It may not be piracy, but that the free resources have become good enough, combined with programming becoming easier to lower the bar for support materials like books. i.e. he's been disrupted. For example, Stackoverflow contributes to this.
I think he's right that the size of his markets means dropping the price wouldn't recoup enough via volume. He can easily get work writing tech materials for proprietary languages and systems (in-house and for-sale e.g. at MS or Oracle) - but what a loss for him and us!
uhhhmm... maybe google could "hire" him? Giving him the same freedom as royalties, and just release his work for free (because it grows the web, which helps google) - perhaps in collaboration with O'Reilly, because authors still need great editors. Though Google might want Android in a Nutshell. Google might also be able to target his work more precisely, with their data on searches, and whether people seem to be happy with the public resources they find, and what particular aspects. Data-driven writing...
However, if your goal is a business as a full-time technical author, piracy is not your major enemy. Can I strongly suggest looking at the self-published ebook versus traditional published book choice as if you were offered it for the first time today? The first gets you on Amazon, puts you in full control of your marketing, let's you experiment with pricing and message, gives you post-launch opportunities for improvement, and bumps your "royalty" to 70 ~ 95%. The second gets wee little advances. If you look at those advances as buying equity in your book, they're the equity equivalent of a personal loan from CapOne.
I'm not arguing that self-publishing isn't the more lucrative option in many cases; I'm just saying that going with a traditional publisher is not necessarily a sucker bet.
There's also the recession, other legal free sources online (which he mentions later), and possibly more competition in his publishing field.
I do feel bad for people whose livelihoods get thrown out of whack and are forced into an uncomfortable position, but it is to be expected with technological advances and is actually happening all over the place (tech-related or not). I wouldn't want to be a teacher in the US these days, either. Take nothing for granted. Don't count on anyone looking out for you, no job is a promise. You basically are on your own in our modern economy.
I appreciate David's perspective on piracy, but I also embrace and understand where Tim O'Reilly is coming from (Far worse to be irrelevant . I think I have the solution. Why not create an entirely new genre of content that offers a greater level of utility than static digital eBooks?
Knowledge is getting created faster than it can be certified, and we need early-adopting gurus like you to light the path forward to new technologies. I'm particularly happy to pay for content on its own, particularly if I perceive that the original content creator is taking a lion's share of the profit.
I know that may not even cross many author's minds, but if there were messages like "95% of the profits from this eBook will be contributed to the author, so that they will continue producing high value content", I believe more people would be inclined to purchase.
Also I won't mention the name of my company here and get flamed for self-promoting, but I will say that I think there's a huge opportunity for publishers, authors, and content creators to disrupt a much larger, adjacent industry, education and its steady "diet" of certifications.
I doubt it. If they don't have the character to buy the book normally, an appeal to the authors needs won't help. You do know it takes more than an author to make a quality book (editor, typesetting, etc).
Little statements like that definitely make a difference.
A lot of pirates do it to avoid buyer's remorse, and finding a message inside appealing to them to support the author is hardly unnoticed.
But the Cliff Notes version is that with Apress I'm meant to get anywhere between 10% and 20% for paper copies (sliding scale depending on # of copies sold) and double the print rate for e-books (so between 20% and 40%). With Pragmatic Programmers I believe the rate is 50%.
So you can win on that deal or lose. If you sell 400 copies, you'd have been better off taking a $10,000 advance. If you sell 4000 copies, you're gonna be much happier with this situation.
It doesn't make sense that when you search +"title" +ebook you get almost only pirate sites. This is the same problem that used to exist with music. Unless it becomes easier to buy ebooks legally, the "pirates" will win.
This is not really Google's fault only though... Some weeks ago I tried to buy a scifi ebook, but was bounced by Amazon because I'm not from the USA. In other stores I had similar problems.
Authors: at least make sure everyone can buy your ebook legally!
Maybe another search engine?
Now the question is, what is the value added of having a hardcopy of SICP, and what is of having a hardcopy -- or e-copy -- of jQuery?
Another issue is bit rot of e-books. With no common long-lived e-book format (perhaps beyond HTML and PDF), you can't readily expect an e-book to be handy with technology in 10 years. It's a fast changing market, as of now.
So, in the end, what is a realistic price for a short-lived e-book?
Unfortunately, I think the method used in the post falls into the "4x more" category. David may have unwittingly increased piracy rather than reducing it.
[1] http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/cialdini.pdf (see the section on Environmental Theft).
It appears that there is a 5th edition of his Javascript book and a 6th edition of another author's HTML book easily reachable from those terms, but no free electronic copy of a 6th edition Javascript book.
Google will remove links to pirated copies of books, one needs only submit a DMCA request. I doubt that DMCA requests will drive publicity for your book launch like an entitled blog post, though.
Why are we talking about this issue at all?
When I go to Youtube and listen to an extremely good song by Twilightning or Edguy, what am I taking from the band? Due to a few different reasons (money, I don't have to) I have never run across anything I will pay money to listen to or watch, books being a small exception since I like well made hardcovers a la Practical Common Lisp. I will, however, refer others to the good movies or music I stumble upon.
Unlike many proponents of torrents, I heavily disagree that all music should be free; that simply is not sustainable in my opinion. Not enough people will then go out of their way to pay for it and I have no idea how well bands do when it comes to concerts/merchandise. I do think that free music benefits bands but that overall benefit increases exponentially with how hard it is to obtain it, because those of us who would never have listened to a band's music before the internet (finding obscure bands via radio is nigh impossible) will often refer them to friends, while the rest who are willing to pay take the easier route - this is important - and buy music.
Currently, torrents, youtube (amusingly, even the official youtube versions are often worse to listen to due to censorship - VEVO is a good example) and other avenues are the better choice for anyone with loose morals, after taking into account risk and ease of access.
tl;dr those of you who will pay for music should subsidize the rest of us.
I always think these things are funny, because the only people who tend to see them are paying customers.