Kindle Unlimited

I can fully understand your sentiment, and to some degree emotionally connect with it, but rationally: my entire bookshelf of computer science and literary classics has gone untouched since my initial read through the vast majority of books.

I keep looking around and I'm not sure that I'm happy with the "ownership" aspect of books, or a lot of stuff in general. (Having moved three times during the last six years, moving books is an awful experience).

This is probably an expression of what I've been feeling in general as of late, but I am extremely happy with the "subscriptionification" of media that's been happening. Spotify's huge library is a net win for me, as opposed to collecting albums for them to just collect dust. For me, revisiting what I used to listen to in high school by over-hearing someone's playlist has a far stronger emotional reaction than revisiting it by walking past a bookshelf.

Regarding stuff disappearing ten, twenty, thirty years from now: my experpience has been the opposite. The Internet has been getting better and better and archiving content of yesterday, and has provided better and better access to it.

My personal lean has been to own less stuff in general, which includes books, music and media in general. So needless to say, I'm pretty excited about Kindle Unlimited.

I hear you on this, and am in sympathy with your point. But this bothers me less than Amazon selling Kindle books does, because at least this is clearly marked as rental.

All your points are just as true about the Kindle books that Amazon sells to people -- you lose the right of first sale(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine), so you can't re-sell or lend your books; they're tied to a specific DRM scheme; they can be modified or "turned off" remotely without your consent; etc. -- only Amazon charges you a flat fee, as if you were actually purchasing it the way you purchase a physical book, which you aren't. You're just purchasing a limited license to access its content via specific devices.

If they're going to be in the business of only selling limited licenses, I'd rather they do it via a subscription model, where every customer will understand that they'll lose access if they stop paying, than via a model designed to look and feel as much as possible like buying a real book. It's at least more honest that way.

The purchasing model that amazon has isn't ownership either, it's rental with an indeterminate end date. Any time you cannot resell something or your children cannot inherit something, you don't own it. In some ways this kindle unlimited subscription is more honest, because it doesn't pretend to be something it isn't.

I totally get what you're saying, but as I've gotten older all of my physical stuff (including books and music) has accumulated to the point where it's become more of a burden and a logistical PITA than a source of pride or pleasure to me.

Up until my mid-30s, I was all about collecting and accumulating things, but since then (~10 years) I've been much more focused on minimizing the amount of physical things I own. The sheer volume of it became oppressive to me. Among other things, I stick to digital media whenever possible. I still own way too much stuff but at least it's kind of under control.

It's all trade-offs, like just about anything in life. I give up some nice things by avoiding physical media, including all of the concerns you (and everyone else) are raising, but at this point in my life, what I get in return far outweighs what I'm losing. This applies to physical vs. digital media, and also to subscription vs. ownership models for digital goods. The weighting pros and cons for these things are different for different people.

Not just ownership, but rights in general, and even worse: the concept of individual independence and empowerment.

There has been a consistent trend to portray the digital/online realm as a world apart from the "real" world, rather than, as is the truth, just another facet of it. This has facilitated massive erosions of civil liberties in the online world. Government censorship is the norm on the internet, not the exception. Warrantless monitoring and trespass on private systems and data by the government and law enforcement is also rampant, with few safeguards. In a similar vein, the protections of the rule of law and the criminal justice system are completely thrown out the window in many circumstances when it comes to the online realm. You can be effectively punished online merely due to an allegation (i.e. DMCA takedown), and often only arbitration is available as a remedy, erasing centuries of traditional protection for individual rights through the court system.

And that's aside from the ongoing war over DRM and the desire of major content aggregators to deny ownership rights and privileges to customers.

Add to that the growing reliance on paternalistic relationships with large corporations and business entities, eroding individualism. People rely on their ISPs and their cell carriers for access to the online world, a major aspect of modern business and private life. Unlike phone service these service providers have much greater leeway to decide what you can and cannot do online and have increasingly taken advantage of consumers. People rely on major services (gmail, hotmail, facebook, twitter, etc.) for their primary means of communication, services that in many cases border on unregulated monopolies. And at work people are increasingly dependent on their employers to provide medical and dental coverage, retirement savings, and so forth.

> ... when it's so much more attractive to companies to rent their products to you for a constant stream of monthly income?

Which companies are you thinking of here? Amazon is still trying to drag book publishers into participating in this, and hasn't had much luck yet. Video subscriptions are more miss than hit. Spotify is the most mature, and (by your estimate) only has 60%-70% of what you want. And there's all kinds of complaints that Spotify doesn't result in the same kind of income that record sales did. I don't think the companies that own the products do like this model.

The reason they do it at all is because it's an effective way to compete with illegal downloading. The $10/month doesn't represent the actual value of the product (which for me at least is probably higher), but seems to represent about what the market will tolerate before it goes back to just torrenting stuff.

And that brings up a really good thing about these services: they address the market-efficiency losses of the copyright regime without needing to either break the law or change it.

For example, suppose the only way to get an ebook is to buy it, and each book costs $X. There are a small number of ebooks you value at more than $X, you buy those ones, and (in economic terms) positive value is created by each exchange.

But there is a much larger number of ebooks you value at more than $0 but less than $X. Those ones you would pay money for, and positive value would be created by that exchange, but the regime of "sell each ebook for $X" doesn't allow that value to be created.

Piracy fully reclaims that value, but has its own problems. All-you-can-eat monthly services also fully reclaim the value (as long as you can afford them and they allow the use you had in mind), but in a way that is mutually agreeable to everybody involved. That makes them a good thing to have around.

The real problem you're bringing up is that all-you-can-eat services don't allow some good and important uses, like saving stuff for later. But so far I'm not seeing any indication that they are replacing buy-it-and-own-it services -- or that content owners have any reason to want them to.

>Will books end up getting unskippable "updates," or even being deleted at the whim of the publishers or Amazon one day?

Amazon can already do this.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/oct/22/amazon-wipes-cu...

i had the same shock you're displaying when i came to the us.

"what do you mean your bank own your home? what if it goes under?"

"what? you pay your car every month, are required to pay the most expensive insurance, and in the end the dealership still owns your car?"

... my guess is that in America anything that makes you pay a little less will have consumers. nobody cares about a bookcase full of old paper as you do. also i think that when the thing matures past the amateurs like EA we will see companies buying rights from other just like it happens with mortgage. apple went under with its flopped Newton watch? amazon buys all its drm licenses and continue to give you access to your media in hopes that your new purchases will come her way.

Half of what I read as a kid came from the library (and by "the library" I mean any one of at least 7 systems) and went back a week later. Half the remainder came from thrift stores and was left back in there in boxes when we moved. How common is it to have a personal physical copy of all your childhood possessions? What's the demographic variation?

Other than some software, as far as I know you still have the option to "own" (ignoring copyright issues for the moment) most digital content. By "own" I mean "make a one-time purchase and then download the media onto your own device" as opposed to "pay a regular subscription fee and stream the media to your device."

I think the "erosion" you observe is simply the phenomenon that many people genuinely prefer subscription models to one-time purchases, or perhaps they prefer to not manage their own files, syncing, etc. I don't think there's anything bad about that.

I think there is something to be said about the environmental impacts of ownership. As much as we love to own things, it isn't sustainable for the environment.

As far as culture goes, I'd like to see mass archiving. I'm unclear whether what the Library of Congress does suffices, at least for the US, but a copy of everything should exist somewhere.

As far as personal access goes, I hear you, but that's how I took myself into near-hoarder territory with media.

I'm not too worried about subscription services becoming the only game in town. As long as some people will pay for permanent access of individual titles, or for value-adds like movie extras, someone will sell them.

The bigger worry is the yanking of the access to stuff you've "bought," of course. But I suspect the first time someone with power either gets hurt or even scared by a DRM-related action, we'll get some mass decisions that come down to "if it looks like a sale and acts like a sale, it's a sale."

You may or may not be able to resell or transfer it (legally), but I seriously doubt the courts will stand for someone arbitrarily taking it away. EULA or no EULA, there's a pretty fat implied promise there, and "buy" is used all over the place in language. That alone would be enough for the EU's courts to seriously hammer anyone who switched it up for "rent".

The early software-related decisions around owning "licensed" copies were in the infancy of digital licensing, and there's plenty of room for reversal there. The VHS time-shifting/personal backup decision is much more in line with what I'd expect the theme to be over time.

In particular, I expect format shifting to become legal as soon as a format shift or service closure screws someone with money/influence.

Right now, the only real-world examples are video game console libraries, and they just don't garner the same sympathy because everyone's predisposed to the idea that software ages out with tech shifts. It'll be when iTunes, Vudu, Amazon, one of those does it that we'll see action.

Also, will books that aren't on Amazon cease to "exist"?

There are a number of books I enjoyed in the paper era that I flat out can't find on Amazon now, and I tend to think of Amazon as "ALL THE BOOKS".

And it is all or none. If you fall on bad times and can't pay the subscription, you cannot have any books. Unlike your owned collection which you can reduce down to books you love. If you are low on cash, you cannot save and buy a book - you have to be subscribed all the time.

If subscription becomes the dominant mode of book consumption, it would be disastrous. As an add on service, it is nice. Especially in the areas without strong library systems.

I also share your sentiment. Completely.

However, I think you're also underestimating the risk of all or parts of your stuff disappearing or getting destroyed in a house-burglary, fire, flood or another kind of disaster.

I'm not entirely sure what the actual risks are, but my gut feeling is that there's a higher chance of losing what you physically own than for it to disappear or get 'updated' as a digital / for-rent product.

After all the Snowden stuff, I worry that it makes it too easy to 'erase' troublesome books when no one actually owns them.

I learnt to read before attending school by literally reading through my parents' bookshelves, the simpler books at first of course … today, I still have many books on shelves but all never books are digital and invisible, especially to children. In addition, digital content is not made for use in a family, it is usually linked to a single account …

Any time I see something that is both interesting and obscure, like an article or a podcast, I have a tendency to packrat it. I have a USB RAID drive full of that stuff. It's a habit I've had for a while and it comes from exactly what you say: the Internet has a short memory.

Copyright infringement to the rescue!

You can even have your cloud-like experiences with software like Plex and Calibre (though I like Plex better, it won't do plain ebooks). Audio books work well enough on Plex, and you can even share the server with friends if you want.

I actually like the rental model for ebooks. The books I usually end up buying are hardcover anyway.

When that holographic storage media finally comes around, we'll just store a full copy of all of human knowledge in our pockets, and this won't really be a problem anymore. That's one possible solution at any rate.

Shall we also get off thine lawn? Having big stacks of books in your home is a relatively recent phenomenon. People used to borrow them from the library or circulate them from person to person. Mass availability of inexpensive books has only been with us for 100 years or so.

How do you know Jeff Bezos didn't tweak a couple of sentences in your Kindle copy of Catch 22? I don't know, but I do know that detecting such a change will be far, far easier with digital publications than it ever was with paper.

Agreed. I don't read many books, but I asked my wife about the last 3 ebooks she'd read. One of the three was already a free book due to Amazon prime and was also included in Kindle Unlimited. The other two weren't available as part of Kindle Unlimited.

So comparing Kindle Unlimited to Netflix's online streaming is actually a pretty accurate correlation. It's currently comprised of second-tier (or lower) books that aren't likely to yield the same profits as new and currently popular titles, so they're used as filler for this service.

Yep, just went through my list of 38 and only 2 are on unlimited. My list is comprised of relatively popular books that are relatively old, nothing like new or anything. Examples: Army at Dawn, Eternal Golden Braid, Tale of Dueling Neurosurgeons, When Genius Failed, Snow Crash, Good Omens, The Signal and The Noise, The Looming Tower. I would expect at least a couple of these to be on there, its not like they're at peak popularity or anything.

But I did chuckle at Piketty's Capital being on unlimited.

How'd you find the overlap between the two? I'm trying to do the same but can't find a simple way to do it other than checking every book.

Was wondering if this could replace my Safari Books Online subscription, and the answer to that is a resounding 'no'.

The current series I'm reading and the last series I read are not available.. nail in coffin for me

Where do you see what is available? Do you have to pay to know?

Same as me. I think I can wait for the list be improved.

I still don't understand why, when content is digital and distribution doesn't cost anything extra, things like this are restricted to specific countries.

I live in France but it worked right away. I still have an old address in the US on my amazon account from when I studied there which might explain why it works.

My credit card's billing address is in France though so I think they're really just trying to make it as easy as possible to sign up while still respecting the letter of the contracts they signed.

I just changed my address to a US one and I was allowed to sign up straight away.

This of course all depends on which country you live in. Where I am from libraries already offer ebook and audiobooks and university libraries have bought licenses from most academic publishers, so that students can download most of their course material and almost all journal articles free of charge. Also all libraries are a 15 minute bike ride away. All of them combined carry a higher quality selection of books than Amazon with their 600.000 could possibly have. Of course they probably won't have some obscure medieval vampire romance novel.

The only books I ever ordered from Amazon were books in foreign languages and academic books that Amazon apparently prints on demand on behalf of publishers. Books in my mother tongue can only be sold at a fixed price set by the publisher, so there is little incentive of buying from a company that mistreats their warehouse workers.

I'm surprised by all the comments in this thread saying that you have to physically go to your library during their open hours to borrow a book. Most libraries I know offer digital downloads through the Overdrive app.

I regularly borrow audiobooks and ebooks from the library with a couple of taps on my iPhone.

> Maybe it's one click instant access. Maybe it's the larger selection, or that lack of having to wait.

Yes. Yes. Yes. As well as book condition/cleanliness, and being able to keep books forever.

My local library is also only open from 10am-6pm, and closed sundays, so unless I want to take time off of work, my only time to go to the library is on a Saturday afternoon. Usually when I buy a book via Amazon, it's spontaneous because of a recommendation. I'll have a friend recommend me a book. Click, it's ordered and shipping. I'll see a book recommended several times in the same HN thread, check reviews for it, click, ordered and shipping. I don't really remember the book's info in order to look up later while at a library.

Currently I have no idea how to check if a book is available at my branch or a nearby branch. I tried going to the library website and clicked their "check availability" link, and I was brought to a calendar for conference room reservations. Amazon is just a much more polished experience than my library. So yeah, I'll buy a book instead of getting it free from the library.

It reminds me of when people say that services like Netflix, Spotify, Steam, etc are cutting down on piracy because in many cases, they provide a simpler experience than the piracy does. Amazon and books (hell, Amazon and most products) provides that same simplification over a cheaper/free distributor.

Libraries have fixed locations you must travel to, and limited collections (rarely more than one copy of each book) of aging content (limited range of latest material). If you want something in particular, good chance it's not available.

Amazon will, from the convenience of any computer (mobile devices included), ship you books from a vast & nearly inexhaustible collection at acceptable costs.

Now the Unlimited plan brings you both for $10/mo: beyond-library-scale of practically free books delivered instantly, and bringing you in close proximity to darn near every book ever written available at modest cost in 2 days.

Heck, many subscribers would pay more than $10/mo just in gas driving to the library.

Just to make sure we're all on the same page. Audible is just another piece of Amazon.

> Amazon became successful by selling books.

Licensing, not selling. Unless you were talking about dead-tree versions.

There are about 2,000 audiobooks available through Kindle Unlimited. Compared with 150,000+ available through Audible.

So yes, if the books you want to listen to are on KU, it's a better deal.

*Full press release embedded here: http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-unlimited-reading-2014...

I assume it's a technical book? There are very few novels I'd pay even $10 for.

Do you think indie paper book publishers don't get screwed?

Which book?

It's dependent on publishers. At any time you can ask Amazon to search through your _entire_ history of Amazon print purchases and it will give you free access to the Kindle versions, if the publisher enabled this feature.

Kindle Unlimited gives you unlimited access to about 600,000 ebooks and audio books on Kindle devices.

Prime gives you free 2-day shipping on a large number of Amazon products and gives you unlimited access to Amazon Video.

I personally was a little surprised (and disappointed) Amazon didn't roll this out as another Prime perk. I'm not sure why making Amazon Video available to Prime members makes financial sense to Amazon, but making Kindle Unlimited doesn't.

edit: With Prime, you also get access to music, some ebooks, and something called "Amazon Pantry". There is a description here:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=2...

Prime gave free access to some ebooks but I'm pretty sure they were mostly classics

Less than a dollar a day for unlimited media consumption doesn't sound like a lot to me. It's still significantly less than 1 cable subscription.

$400 or so was about one month's budget for me for media, though that included games and my $100/mo cable bill.

I'm way ahead with KU (was using Oyster), Netflix/Hulu, and Rdio. If someone comes out with a decent all-you-can-eat gaming service that doesn't make me juggle discs, I'll be way, way ahead.

Amazon isn't intentionally discriminating against your country, they don't have a choice.

Are books fungible?

If you're in a rich Western country, the time you spend reading a book probably has an opportunity cost much greater than the cost to acquire rights to read the book. Why would you spend 10 hours with a book whose marginal cost is $0, when you could pay $10 and spend those ten hours with a better book?

this is the first comment in this thread that is not predicting the future. there is some 200 i just scrolled past above.

yeah, amazon prime content is anything but prime. odd seasons of old series. movies that even late night open tv is embarrassed of showing, and now teen romances.

I completely agree with you. Right now, I mostly rely on audiobooks from my public library system (the price point -- free -- is hard to beat). Audible (also owned by Amazon) is really the only other decent option for professionally narrated stuff (I've tried non-professionally-narrated stuff, and it's generally really bad). And since people don't generally listen to the same audiobook over and over again, the way they do with music, I don't think many people will mind that they don't get to "own" a copy of the book, like with Audible. If it weren't for the fact that Audible has a far better selection, I'd say it would be ridiculous for anyone to continue with Audible over Kindle Unlimited. I mean, one audiobook a month vs. unlimited? No hard decision there.

Agreed. Did you checked the list if it is really good?

To answer your question: Try searching the Kindle store for something that is in Kindle Unlimited. For example: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3D... You'll see "$0.00 kindleunlimited" for books that are available. The selection is grim.

Do you know how you and the publisher are compensated in this situation? I'm assuming there is some sort of royalty stream coming back to you? (I'm not asking for details, just generalities).

There are plenty of people already on the $15/mo plan with Audible. Myself included. I listen to audio books on my commute. The difference with my more expensive plan is that I get too keep the audio books. Though I have not re-listened to any so this is something for me to think about.

"I'm not sure if anyone will binge read books the same way people do with the other two services."

Surely you're joking, right? $9.99 is typically close-to the cost of a single ebook. For any avid reader, they'll easily blow through at least a few books a month.

Where did you see that? The KLL page is still up and accepting Prime memberships, and the Kindle Select (author program behind KU and KLL) terms are clear that authors can opt their books into or out of either or both.

Edit: I do notice that the website doesn't display the KLL option for me on eligible books, but I assume that's because my KU subscription enables less restrictive access to the same book.

It seems I'm wrong about that. Apologies.

I assume the same way they do with KDP Select where prime members can borrow a free book once a month. Amazon will set aside a pool of money and divide it among the books that were read each month as part of the program.

nope... very limited audio selection compared to the audible.com catalog.

The copyrights are often dispersed, with different publishers owning different rights. It's not a matter of just "arrang[ing] for worldwide licensing." It's dealing with a completely different set of owners who may have no interest in signing on.

Of COURSE Amazon wants to access customers in other countries, it's not like they haven't thought of it!

Publishing and Media (Music, Movies & Entertainment) are two sectors known to have illogical business practices and entrenched interests. The internet is still trying to disrupt these sectors, Amazon would love to take your credit card number but they have to operate on what is possible and choose their fights wisely.

Secondly, US is the trend-setter in many things internet, that may be coming to an end but companies would want to try new things in a market they have most comfort before expanding out.

I don't understand why you have been down-voted so much for this comment. I too feel the pain (living in Canada) and I love my Kindle. I wish Amazon showed more support internationally, or at least to the neighbours in the north.