More Whoppers from the AAP
/MassLive’s Alison Kuznitz has explored Massachusetts’ efforts to enact a law for fair library ebook pricing in “Publishers look to make edits to Mass. lawmaker’s E-book access bill.”
RF commends State Rep. Ruth Balser for her efforts to give library users a fair shake in a market that is all-too unfair.
As usual, the Association Of American Publishers (AAP) have provided opposing testimony riddled with falsehoods.
Here are the claims, according to the article: “the proposals conflict with the U.S. Copyright Act, which protects the distribution of literary works among authors and publishers. Authors would not be properly compensated and intellectual property would be devalued should the bills move forward” ‘They [ebooks] can be easily copied, made perfect copies, made unlimited number of copies, that publishers approach their licensing of e-books to libraries for digital lending in a different way than physical books’.”
How are these lies? Let us count the ways.
Conflict with the U.S. Copyright Act? Nope. As explained by Authors Alliance Dave Hansen, in the article: “This bill does no such thing -- it’s carefully and narrowly crafted. It doesn’t compel publishers to license. Instead, it merely provides that Massachusetts and its contract law will not be used to aid publishers in their efforts to limit libraries’ rights.” Publishers can publish what they want and charge what they want. They just can’t license in this state except under fair terms. Saying this law would be a violation of copyright doesn’t make it so.
Authors not compensated? Nonsense. If we could get fair terms, librarians would if anything license more. MORE authors are likely to be compensated,, especially authors who may not be best-sellers, as libraries get more varied and deeper content. The income would simply be distributed differently, but the total amount of income might well grow. Possibly readers would discover—and ultimately buy—more books. Publishers could easily ensure more authors were compensated. Don’t blame libraries for your greed.
Intellectual property would be devalued. No, costs would simply reflect what publishers get from print in libraries rather than the inflated prices of the current unfair licensing.
Piracy from library ebooks? Ha ha ha ha ha! Bogus! Piracy is a problem, but please show us how it stems from library ebooks. They are digitally protected and the people borrowing them don’t need to pirate. I could claim that if publishers offered fair terms, there would be less piracy because more people would borrow legitimately with as much authority as the AAP can cry piracy. I won’t make that claim. There’s no proof. But please show proof of instances of piracy stemming from library ebooks. I’ll wait.
How can anyone believe these transparently weak claims?
Here’s one last one: “This legislation threatens the entire creative economy.” No. This legislation would stop the plutocratic international mega-corporations that control publishing, too often at the expense of creators, from ripping off libraries and trying to drive readers from libraries and force them to pay for books they will never really own.
Good on you, Massachusetts!