A More Detailed Look at the Library Boycott of Macmillan EBooks

/

Carmi Parker, ILS Administrator for Whatcom County Library System, has announced that two more libraries have joined the boycott, bringing the total up to 79 systems. The new libraries are Anoka County (MN) with 8 branches serving a population of 340,000 and Merrimack Valley Library Consortium with 36 branches serving 779,000.

Ms. Parker and Ms. Coan have prepared a more detailed look at the results of the boycott, which may be found here. While the numbers on the effect of the boycott remain the same, the expansion includes much more information on patron responses, including many positive interactions with library users who have seen library notice of Macmillan’s practices or any of the numerous media articles. Tips for communicating to staff and patrons are also included, with examples such as Fairfax County LIbary’s (VA) information web page. The authors discuss ways to talk with stakeholders, such as library trustees, referencing ULC’s Fair E-Book and E-Audiobook Lending for Libraries. FAQs include information on ALA’s stand, how smaller libraries might help, and the WHY of the boycott (which might seem counterintuitive to libraries’ usual desire to provide access), while an Appendix explains the various types of boycotting that different libraries are trying.

For those interested in the effects of the boycott, details about it, and libraries’ efforts to ensure access, a must read!

A Canadian Legislator Takes Interest and U.S. Efforts Seem to be Ramping Up

/

RF Working Group Member Susan Caron shares Radio Canada International’s report “Libraries and publishers on a different page over e-books and audiobooks” by Marc Montgomery.

Of particular interest is that a legislator is callng upon the Canadian government to investigate:

“This week a federal Member of Parliament in northern Ontario, Charlie Angus of Timmins-James Bay, called on the federal government to look into the issue, writing to the Heritage Minister to seek fairer access rights. Last month Timmins city council passed a motion urging the federal government to assist municipal libraries in regard to the issue.

While understanding the need to support Canadian publishers and compensate authors, libraries say they’re not looking for handouts, but rather a more equitable balance for the producers and for access by citizens.”

Thank you, Mr. Angus, for your efforts! RF, and especially our Canadian members, wish you success.

Meanwhile in the USA, rumor has it that the ALA may be forming a group to share and coordinate legal and legislative efforts at the state level to address access restrictions on content by the Big 5 and Amazon. Librarians in several states have apparently begun to involve their legislatures or employ legal counsel. More details as they emerge!

News from Andrew Albanese: "This Week In Libraries," January 17

/

PW’s Andrew Albanese has documented a busy week in libraries that is, as always, worth a read.

  • HOUSE BILL NO. 2044 in Missouri has librarians and lovers of intellectual freedom deeply concerned over establishing “five-member boards, elected by a majority vote at local town meetings, that would be empowered to determine what materials are appropriate for minors in the library. Notably, public librarians are explicitly barred from serving on such review boards—even if they live in the community.” The Blue-noses are back—though unfortuately they never seem to leave. Sign a petition against the bill here, but even more importantly, work to make sure any similar efforts in your state get dismissed.

  • Congratulations from RF to new ALA Executive Director Tracie D. Hall.

  • As posted on RF yesterday, two librarians are quantifying the results (so far) of the library Macmillan Boycott.

  • Check out NPR’s report on the Top Ten Circulating Books of All Time at the New York Public LIbrary.

  • Jason Reynolds has been named National Ambassador for Young People's Literature. Congratulations, Mr. Reynolds—very well deserved!

Thanks, Mr. Albanese, for compiling the news!

Is the Macmillan Boycott Working?

/

Dianne Coan, Division Director of Technical Operations at Fairfax County Public Library in Fairfax, VA., and Carmi Parker, a librarian and ILS administrator who serves on the executive advisory committee for the Washington Digital Library Consortium (and who is also a ReadersFirst Working Group member), whose systems have ceased to purchase Macmillan eBooks, have collaborated on a financial impact analysis of the boycott thus far and asked to publish it with RF. Thank you, Dianne and Carmi, for your work. RF hopes it will spark interest and create debate.

One may also see a their work here with better graphics.

Is the Boycott Working?

As of the date of publication, 79 library systems and consortia have ceased to purchase Macmillan eBooks in protest of their new sales policy, which limits library eLending. These libraries represent 1,163 locations in 28 states, and serve 47.9 million people, which is equivalent to the total population of California plus the population of New York City.

Is it making a difference?

Analysis shows that despite Macmillan’s claims about desiring to “restore balance,” the embargo is merely an attempt by Macmillan to boost revenue in the same way that they increased their base price to libraries from $40.00 to $60.00 in 2018. Here’s how it works:

Liane Moriarty’s Nine Perfect Strangers was released in November 2018. At Fairfax County Public Library (FCPL) which serves 1.1 million residents in northern Virginia, 400 readers requested the book before its release; in response, FCPL purchased 67 copies at $60.00 each. Adjusting for OverDrive’s negotiated percentage, Macmillan earned $2010.00.

What if Nine Perfect Strangers had been released in November 2019? According to Macmillan, 8%, or 32, of the 400 readers who wanted the book would have purchased it rather than waiting. These 32 retail purchases will have generated $336.00. After the embargo, the library purchases 62 copies to cover the remaining 368 readers who were willing to wait. At Macmillan’s new pricing, this creates $1845.00 in revenue for the company. In total, they receive $2181.00, which is an 8.5% increase over a release that was not embargoed.

However, FCPL has ceased to purchase Macmillan eBooks and Macmillan has traded $336.00 in retail sales for $2010.00 in library sales, a loss of 83%.

In other words, the boycotting libraries are making a difference, creating an 83% loss in revenue instead of an 8.5% gain. If about one in 10 library systems cease to purchase Macmillan eBooks, they will offset the gains Macmillan hoped to make and ensure that its revenue is flat. For every library that boycotts after that, Macmillan will see a net loss on the embargo strategy.

Are we at one in 10?

Not quite, although we are close. In the 2017 IMLS Public Library Survey, 7162 libraries recorded spending on electronic materials. Of those, 605 libraries are currently boycotting Macmillan eBooks, or 8.45%.

Other impacts to Macmillan authors

In the meantime, we are looking at the results of the boycott to determine impact to patrons. At the Washington Digital Library Consortium (WDLC), serving 826,000 Washington State residents, we saw that circulation in the last two months of the year (during the boycott) fell only 2% below expectation. Since Macmillan represented approximately 5% of our circulation in the prior year, we conclude that readers who normally would have discovered Macmillan books are discovering Macmillan’s competitor authors instead. FCPL saw no decrease in circulation over the same time period.

These numbers are in line with the findings of a library eBook reader survey conducted the Jefferson County Library in Port Hadlock, WA. When patrons were asked about their next step after deciding not to place a hold on an eBook (usually due to wait time), the 891 respondants reported the following: 56% reported that they went on to look for another eBook or eAudiobook that is currently available; approximately 30% reported that they searched for the title in print or as a book-on-CD; 8% go on to purchase the title (confirming Macmillan's assertion); 6% chose "None of the above.”

Conclusion

In the 2019 webcast launching #eBooksforall, Columbus (Ohio) Metropolitan Library CEO Patrick Losinski stated that libraries are not competitors with publishers; we are collaborators. This is true, but we are also, first and foremost, important customers. We predictably spend millions of dollars every year across the lists. And with eBooks, we are the only way for publishers to earn revenue from the millions of people who want to read books but cannot or will not pay retail prices.

And as cooperative customers who truly value Macmillan’s product, we have tried for five months to communicate our dissatisfaction with its new terms, requesting that it drop the embargo and explaining why it is important to us. In our opinion, a national outcry from a valuable customer is reason enough alone Macmillan to drop the embargo. However, it appears willing to gamble that despite libraries’ frustrations, we will continue to pay the bills. The boycotting libraries have said no, and we invite other libraries to join us. Collectively, we can ensure that embargoes are too expensive for any publisher to implement.

DPLA and BiblioLabs Partner on Statewide EBooks Access

/

The Digital Public Library of America (DPLS) has issued a press release. RF runs it as becasue of the innovative nature of the new model.

The Digital Public Library of America has partnered with BiblioLabs to offer libraries the ability to license a growing collection of more than 16,000 ebooks, including independent author collections and titles from a number of major publishers, using a simultaneous multi-use model that allows an unlimited number of patrons to borrow books at the same time. BiblioLabs has been a pioneer in statewide ebook projects, using innovative and sustainable lending models to help libraries scale ebook programs in new and exciting ways. The partnership will give state libraries the unprecedented ability to provide ebook collections to every resident in the state. 

"The simultaneous multi-use model is a powerful way to reach new digital-first users who have yet to discover their local library. The model also provides expanded access for people who don’t live near a library or can’t get to one,” said Michele Kimpton, Director of Business Development and Senior Strategist. “We are excited to partner with BiblioLabs to offer unlimited access to a diverse and curated collection of books and work with state libraries and others to offer these to all of their residents.”  

“Forward-looking publishers and independent authors realize that libraries are an important asset to their missions. This is a true collaboration that helps libraries compete for digital attention in a way that provides readers what they want in a simple, easy-to-use model. We are proud to be working with DPLA to offer an ebook model that is inclusive and does not financially punish libraries for succeeding at their mission to drive literacy and reading across a wide spectrum of readers,” said BiblioLabs CEO Mitchell Davis. 

In addition to expanding its ebook offerings, DPLA has expanded its team, welcoming Jill Blades as ebooks outreach program leader. Blades comes to DPLA from Baker and Taylor, where she worked with both school and public libraries all over the U.S., most recently as field sales consultant to public libraries in the Southeast. With her deep expertise and knowledge of library workflows, Blades will strengthen DPLA’s partnerships with libraries across the country, helping them to improve patron access to ebooks and audiobooks through the DPLA Exchange.

DPLA’s ebook work has been supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. SimplyE, the open e-reading platform, was developed by The New York Public Library. To learn more about Open Bookshelf, SimplyE and other DPLA ebooks offerings, visit ebooks.dp.la.

DPLA will be sharing details about our 2020 work, including our national ebooks collaboration, at ALA Midwinter in Philadelphia later this month:

Saturday, January 25

3-4 pm:  DPLA: What’s New for 2020 in Room 201-ABC

Carmi Parker's Macmillan eBook Update 1/10/2020

/

The redoubtable Carmi Parker (disclaimer—Ms. Parker is member of RF’s Working Group) has shared a weekly Macmillan update:

“Happy New Year all!

We are beginning to draft a document on the impact that boycotting libraries are making, and we hope to share it with libraries that are still debating how best to respond to the embargo.  The doc will include:

  • Analysis of the financial impact on Macmillan

  • How close we are to the tipping point where Macmillan starts to lose money

  • How the boycott has impacted circulation so far

  • What patrons are saying

If your library is considering whether to stop purchasing Macmillan, is there other information that you would find useful?  Let me know.

In this week’s update, we have three new libraries who have ceased purchasing eBooks.

{Those are First Regional Library, serving Five counties in NW Mississippi, including suburbs of Memphis, with 300,000 patrons) Dedham Public Library, in Dedham, MA with 25,000 patrons, and Oakland Public Library with 429,000 patrons.]

Also, would you like to know: if the wait time on an eBook is too long, how many patrons turn to the print version?  Or how long patrons will wait in the first place?  The eBook reader survey results from Jefferson County Library will tell all this and more.

Please feel free to share this post.  Interested colleagues can sign up for their own email updates here.”

Thanks, Carmi, for all you do to enhance the library digital content experience!

Help with a Query, Please

/

Andrew Albanese from Publishers Weekly has a question for librarians, and I hope you will help.  Please respond to him at aalbanese@publishersweekly.com

“Has there been an upside to the recent Macmillan fight: has it finally, effectively publicized that, yes, you can get e-books from the library? Librarians in previous years have told me that about 10% of their library patrons used the digital collection, or less in some cases. I am sure that’s higher today, yes? But when I was researching for a panel I did at DPLA, I was surprised to see the most popular articles that came back during a Google search were “did you know you can borrow e-books from the library?” Now, that’s not the case, as you might expect!

Did you see an increase in demand/awareness for e-books in 2019? And while I know its hard to tie any rise directly to public awareness generated by the Macmillan fight, do you have any perception that this battle has helped get the word out about e-books and digital audio in public libraries?”

Thank you for considering!

Two Articles of Interest

/

The publisher changes in library e-book licensing continue to get notice in the media. In part it might be because controversy sells, but major outlets are showing a genuine concern for what these changes, especially of course Macmillan’s, mean for readers.

Thanks to RF Working Group Member Susan Caron for sharing an editorial from the Toronto Star, “Public libraries need a fairer deal on ebooks.” It uses examples of the impacts of publisher decisions on the Toronto Library, but makes many good general points and its conclusion is as succinct a statement of the issue for libraries:

“ . . . these restrictive rules and high digital pricing for libraries is really starting to look like price gouging and publishers taking advantage of publicly funded institutions. Publishers seem, at best, to be pursuing a short-term sales strategy. But it comes at the risk of fostering a love of reading over the longer term and increasing the troubling digital divide between the have and have nots. The major houses should rethink these polices and find a way to give libraries a fairer deal.”

Stephen Spohn, Director-at-Large, Association of Specialized, Government and Cooperative Library Agencies, has shared an article from WGBH , “Inside The E-Book 'War' Waging Between Libraries And Publishers,” that is wider ranging.

It notes that “the Massachusetts Library Association said they have reached out the state’s attorney general, hoping that her office will bring legal action against publishers. Librarians are also hopeful that relief will come from a Congressional antitrust subcommittee investigating competition in digital markets,” confirming that states other than Rhode Island and Maryland are seeking possible legal remedy.

After reviewing a 5 year period Andrew Albanese terms “a plateau of mediocrity” in which neither libraries nor publishers were happy, the article goes into the arguments and counter arguments of the current environment.

Perhaps most intriguing, however, are, first, the notes on how Amazon may benefit the most from “the war” (and tough the article does not state is, can if be inferred that Amazon is holding the publishers’ collective feet to the fire as Amazon benefits from its own “exclusive content.” Second, the article looks at the possible outcome of legal recourse. “Einer Elhauge, an antitrust expert at Harvard Law School, has looked into this topic. Elhauge parsed the arguments, and as far as he can tell from all the media reports, libraries would not have an easy time winning this case. The publishers do not seem to be violating the rules. There’s no single publishing house with monopoly power. In fact, from a legal standpoint, Elhauge said, there could be an argument against libraries.”

I’m not legal expect and I don’t play one on the internet. I wonder if a possible tack would be to look at collusion. When the Big Publishers and Apple lost on agency pricing, there was no house with monopoly power either. And perhaps if legislators are interested in putting pressure on Big Tech, Amazon’s failure to license to libraries and privileging of one library vendor over others might offer something to consider. It’s always going to have been a difficult fight. But readers should need credit cards to be informed citizens. Both articles are worth a read, and the publicity for our views is important. So, my fellow librarians, look at both and then saddle up Rocinante. We ride because the war, if it must be called that, is worth fighting. A truce based upon a new license model, such as the one we proposed to Macmillan some weeks back on this site, might be the best result we can hope for, but our readers deserve our best effort.

The Annual RF Cheers 'N Jeers and People of the Year

/

With the New Year fast approaching, time for the ReadersFirst Working Group’s Cheers ‘N Jeers for 2019.

Cheers!

  • Alan Inouye, the American Library Association (Thanks, Wanda) and the Public Library Association (Thanks, Ramiro) for your leadership in creating eBooksforAll and for advocacy in the industry (thanks, also, Sari), and federal and state governments. Thanks, to, for creating a new Digital Content Working Group, and to Lean Dunn and Kelvin Watson for chairing it.

  • Andrew Albanese of Publishers Weekly, for telling the library story factually and well. We are all better informed because of you.

  • The Canadian Urban Library Council, for advocacy with publishers and providing the template for the resolution that ALA adopted in July, leading to the creation of a new Digital Content Working Group, and while we are about it, the Urban Library Council and COSLA for fine advocacy work for library digital content..

  • Carmi Parker for leading the charge on Macmillan and Blackstone, the State of Washington (thanks, Lisa of KCLS and Cindy of WSL) , and all who have joined the resistance against “windowing.” Boycotts aren’t for everyone, but this one has its reasons.

  • The Digital Public Library of America, for continued development of the non-profit Exchange and for leading in the establish of of the SimplyE Advisory Council, especially to Michele.

  • Georgia Public Library Service and Baker & Taylor for establishing an innovative state-wide digital platform of children, eReadsKids. Thanks for showing what can be done, and doing it above all for the children.

  • Harper Collins Publishers for NOT making any changes in their license models in the last 18 months. Hey, HC—want to earn an RF Gold Star Award? Add a one copy/one user perpetual license option—even one pr library system—to give us flexibility to your current metered model, which is (despite all past criticism) the BEST model offered by the Big 5 today.

  • Ijeoma Oluo, an author for speaking truth on Twitter for libraries and those who need them.

  • The National Information Standards Organization (NISO) for fostering work on Fasten to develop standards for library APIs, including Nettie, Christoper, and a brilliant international team.

  • The New York Public Library and especially to Risa, Leonard, and Tony, for their continued support of Library Simplified (app name—SimplyE). It’s a lot of work but RF applauds the development of the “one App to Rule Them All,” providing an easy-to-use open source non-profit way to harness library content across platforms. Other systems might have flinched—you have shown Patience, Fortitude, and leonine courage.

  • OverDrive, for providing data effectively challenging publisher claims that libraries are “cannibalizing” sales and for funding the Panorama Project.

Jeers!

  • Amazon, for all your fine work ensuring that people need a credit card to be informed citizens. We’d award you a 100,00 lumps of coal, but you’d just give one piece to each of your exploited warehouse workers for Christmas and use the rest to press a diamond for the CEO. Nothing for you, just like you give to us.

  • Blackstone Audio, you know perfectly well why. We award you with one black stone—a lump of coal for you

  • Hachette, for moving from perpetual to metered licenses on audiobooks. It isn’t bad enough that we have to renew most of our e-book collections every two years, you have to throw audio in as well? Thanks on behalf of all library users with visual or hand impairments who rely on libraries for content they need.

  • Macmillan, you know ever better than Blackstone why. We award you 231,842 (and counting) signatures on a petition.

  • Simon & Schuster, we appreciate you moving from one to two year licenses, but who factored your prices when you made the change? We award you a pocket calculator so you can multiply by 2 next time.

People of the Year:

This is a tough one—too tough for us! So, alphabetically by first name Alan, Carmi, Ijeoma, Michele, and NYPL Library Simplified Team, thanks for your great work this year. You are co-winners.

Thanks, too, to the ReadersFirst Working Group for all their advocacy work this year.

Thanks, finally, to every librarian who licensed content for your system or who helped someone get content this year. Your service to our readers is the reason for our service to libraries. Keep helping people get content! We’ll help try to make that content everything they want.