HarperCollins Donkey Punches Librarians!


Please be Gentle

A considerate lover is always a good thing, whether in bed or everyday life.  Roses, sweet nothings whispered in a paramour’s ear, generally being attentive, all these things contribute to a great relationship.

So why is HarperCollins playing so rough with librarians?

 In an on-line article earlier this week for Library Journal, Josh Hadro chronicles the recent decision by HarperCollins to restrict the number of circulations of ebook titles by libraries to a strangely arbitrary number of 26.  Yep, libraries can distribute their ebooks 26 times and then they have to pay for a new license.

Why 26 times?

“Josh Marwell, President, Sales for HarperCollins, told LJ that the 26 circulation limit was arrived at after considering a number of factors, including the average lifespan of a print book, and wear and tear on circulating copies.” (from the article)

Reaaaaallllly?  So what’s next Mr. Marwell?  Will you be sending out notices to librarians across the nation that once a book has been loaned out 26 times, it’s time to rip the cover off, return it, and buy a new copy?

Granted, even with this decision, HarperCollins is still more graceful than a couple of its competitors. 

“While HarperCollins is the first major publisher to amend the terms of loan for its titles, two other members of the publishing “big six”—Macmillan and Simon & Schuster—still do not allow ebooks to be circulated in libraries…”.

Look, it’s understandable that ebook piracy is hitting publishers traditionally small profit margin and that the bread and butter of both publishers and authors is sales and the accompanying residuals.  The rise of ebooks has also cut into these margins, although one would think it has radically reduced publication costs.

(after all, there’s no physical book to print, bind or distribute)

What’s not to be understood (or tolerated) is this ridiculous attempt to squeeze a little more out of a social service itself falling on hard times.

Libraries have never been the go-to service when relegating public funds, so increasing their cost of operating really isn’t a smart idea.  They’re also a great marketing tool, showcasing authors, sponsoring book clubs, generally doing a portion of the marketing department’s work for them.

Furthermore, they’ve also already paid for the product.  It’s their property to do with as they will, isn’t it?

Show a little tenderness HC (and company), be a considerate lover, not a brute!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s