Is buying books online immoral?
This seems a little ridiculous to me. It’s true that as used book sales rise, sales of new (and more expensive) copies are likely to decline. But if I go online and buy a used copy of a book, that’s not cheating the author. I’m not in an immoral quandary. If I decided not to buy the book at all, would anyone claim that I was taking money out of the author or publisher’s pocket? If I read my library’s copy instead of buying my own? How is this argument any less specious?
Unless I’m missing something, online book resellers bought the book from the publisher — if not directly, then at least from whomever first bought it. Even if the book is a castoff or all but free at a yard sale, at some point, money did exchange hands. No matter how low the re-sale price is now, and no matter that the author and publisher are cut out from a share of the re-sell profits, the book was bought and paid for. The author will receive whatever percentage of the original sale the publisher’s contract allows.
If some of the books sold online are review or gratis copies, and that’s taking a significant bite out of the earnings on a book, then the publishers should limit the number of free books they send out. They should try to limit the number to people who will actually review or endorse the book, and hold on to their copies rather than turn around and re-sell them.
The right of resale has existed for a very long time, even before the internet came along to make the process quicker and easier. I buy the argument that the internet has changed bookselling and publishing, often drastically cutting into profits. Small brick and mortar bookshops have been hard hit, and book sales overall have declined. As someone who works in publishing, I have a vested interest in getting people to buy more new books. But buying used books is not the problem. It may very well be a symptom of a larger problem — why are more people buying used books instead of new? — but it’s the larger problem that ought to be fixed.
Sheesh.
Sounds like somebody’s been reading just a little too much of the RIAA’s hype.
Clearly there are two answers to this problem:
1. Books are too well-made: Books have bindings that last, covers that absorb damage, and pages you can turn without damage. By making the entire works out of the cheapest materials possible the book will disintegrate after even the most cursory of readings. People will be forced to purchase a new copy if they ever want to read the exciting tale within. Imagine a family’s pride at purchasing a palette of ‘lender copies’ for each of their favorite books.
2. Book aren’t well-made enough: Books have boring binding, mass-produced covers, and pages that are exactly the same between copies. They are not ‘prestige’ objects and you will never see one carried by today’s fading generation of heiress starlets. It’s time to go back to forcing authors to hand-copy their books. Each mistake and smudge becomes the mark of distinction on a treasured family heirloom. Inlaying unique patterns of precious and semiprecious stone and metal further enhances value, and including small trinkets from the writer leaves little doubt that the $40,000 cover price is absolutely deserved. Who doesn’t want a small charm pendant filled with Stephen King’s blood?
I pass my review copies on to the local library, so I think any bad karma is neutralized that way. But I do know that the library may turn around to sell it.
Buying used or online doesn’t make something immoral, per se. The double effect principle might apply in this case. The act of buying the book is, at worst, morally neutral, but I’d argue that it’s essentially good. After all, buying the book is better than stealing it. The person buying the book intends for it to be a good act: they want to read the book, and they’ll purchase it. That person is buying it, legally, and is paying the seller. Whether money later trickles down to the publisher or author is irrelevant, because it’s a different transaction. And, finally, the good that comes with buying the book (doing something that is legal; paying somebody for a good) has outweighed the bad effect (not directly paying the publisher, seller of new books, or author) , and the buyer of the book has exercised his or her obligations by handing over the payment for the book. As well, there’s the environmental consideration: the good of saving paper, ink, and energy in producing a brand new book for the reader by buying the used copy outweighs the economic damage to publisher and author.
At least, I think so.
Yes, from an environmental viewpoint, it’s altogether possible that buying used books is the more moral choice.
I should add that I do not think selling or donating review copies is necessarily a bad thing. That’s in the nature of publishing: you send out copies for review and, if you’re lucky, get a small handful of reviews in return. Many of the books you send out will be tossed, donated, or re-sold. The Strand bookstore in NY has a long-standing tradition of re-selling review copies, and I don’t know if any of that money goes to the publisher and author. I don’t know that any of it should. That’s the collateral cost of marketing a book. If the cost is too high, you limit the number of review copies you send out, try to better target your potential reviewers, or stop marketing the book like this altogether.
Which, I have to say, is a pretty lousy idea. Despite shrinking book review sections in major newspapers, reviews are still very important — especially for a midlist book that might otherwise escape attention.
I just don’t think used books or re-sold reviewer copies are the problem. Publishing is in some bad financial straits right now, but I think that’s a product of an overall financial crisis, coupled with declining readership and the industry’s over-reliance on a blockbuster model to sell books.
Buying used sometimes is the only way to find a book, especially if it’s out of print. There’s a great used bookstore in Las Cruces, NM (http://www.coasbooks.com/) that fills four stores. (Well, for you, who lives in New York City, it’s about the size of one bookstore.) Definitely worth a trip if you ever venture out to the desert.