A number of writers I know believe that the Google settlement is the best way to get their old books back into circulation. Their thinking is that, once the book is on the web as part of Google Books, the vast library of texts that Google will make available in various ways, new readers may find these old books. And the authors may realize new profits.
Let’s analyze the above and figure out whether it makes as much sense as some writers believe.
Q: Is having your book scanned by Google the only way to get it out on the web and available?
A: No. If you still have a word processing file of your manuscript you can publish your book yourself on smashwords with just a few keystrokes, in an electronic format, and offer it for sale. You’d get 85 percent of the profits from smashwords versus the 63 percent that Google is offering. And if you got a better deal elsewhere, you could take it. Contrast that with Google’s book scanning venture which requires you to enter into a binding 100+ page contract (the Google settlement) that nobody has yet thoroughly analyzed on your behalf.
Q: What’s wrong with opting into the settlement (signing the “contract”)?
A: I don’t believe that anyone has adequately parsed what’s in the settlement agreement or what its ramifications may be for the long-term. I don’t typically sign contracts without knowing whether the terms are favorable to me. Do you?
Q: But wouldn’t my book get more attention if it were part of the Google library of scanned books?
A: Not necessarily. Google, the search engine, finds material on the web for searchers based on keyword searches and ranks the material it finds based on various other criteria. As your original manuscript, if uploaded, would include all the same key words that your scanned Google Books version would, your own book wouldn’t necessarily be at a disadvantage.
Q: But I know nothing about publishing on the web. Why not just leave it to Google?
A: Again, see smashwords. You don’t need to know how to publish. All the instructions are there, plain and simple. Even so, you might decide that Google is your best option. But it’s important for this to be an informed choice. You need to weigh the costs against the benefits of agreeing to a 100+ page contract (the settlement), which is what you’d be doing in order to participate.
Q: Do I have to decide right now whether to participate?
A: Unfortunately, yes. You only have until May 5, 2009 to decide to opt out. If you don’t, you’re in. The decision is made for you. But you can opt out now – and you may be able to opt in later, according to page 33 of the settlement notice:
“If you opt out of the Settlement, you will not be eligible for a Cash Payment or to participate in any of the revenue models under the Settlement. You will, however, have the right to bring your own lawsuit. In addition, even if you opt out of the Settlement, you may still be able to contact the Registry or Google at a later date to attempt to negotiate a separate deal for inclusion of your Books in any of the Settlement Agreement programs.”
That “Cash Payment” you won’t be eligible for is all of 60 bucks. (To help you judge whether you believe this is an adequate payment, see my earlier post for what the minimum statutory penalty is for willful infringement). And you only get the 60 bucks if Google has already scanned your book. If not, you get nothing. Zip. Is that a sufficient incentive for you to opt in?
Q: Can I opt in now and opt out later?
A: Nope. You may be able to change some of the terms of how your book will be displayed or other incidentals but you will have agreed, by default, to the terms of a 100+ page settlement.
Again, do you know what those terms are? Has anyone analyzed them on your behalf and given you all the pros and cons? And have the pros been so strongly in your favor that the cons seem inconsequential?
If you haven’t done that analysis, and you’re gung ho to go ahead anyway, I’d like some of what you’ve been smoking.
– Anita Bartholomew
What’s a fair ebook royalty?
Tags: book publishing, e-books, e-reader, ebook, ebooks, electronic books, ipad, Kindle, Publishing technology
This is a question that’s come up quite a bit lately with author and editor friends. Are the current standard ebook royalties (25 percent of receipts) fair? And if not, what would be fair?
The argument for raising royalties to 50 percent or greater of receipts is that ebooks don’t cost publishers anything to produce: no paper, no printing, no binding, no warehousing, no shipping, no returns. Whatever investment in editing, promotion, typesetting and design that the publisher made, had to be made in order to produce the print book. Producing an e-version is a trivial additional cost. So authors should get at least half because for the publisher, ebook revenue is gravy.
That argument assumes that everything stays the same in publishing and that ebooks will continue to be a small portion of books sold. We know, however, that publishing isn’t staying the same. Sales of e-readers and ebooks have risen dramatically in just the past year. Between the Kindle and the iPad, almost everyone expects that the ebook will be embraced by more readers. The pace of adoption should increase dramatically. The open question is how to quantify that adjective “dramatically.”
And for virtually every ebook bought, a print book isn’t.
Right now, ebooks are estimated to be about 5 percent of the market. What happens to the industry when they’re 25 percent?
Anyone who has read this blog more than once knows that I’m a fierce advocate for writers, am against the Google settlement because it’s a worse deal for writers than writers can get on their own from Google, and have urged writers to stand up for their rights on pay, copyright, and other issues.
So you might be surprised to learn that I’m not convinced that writers should demand 50 percent of receipts for ebook royalties.
I agree that 25 percent of receipts is too low. Publishing guru Mike Shatzkin estimates that on hardcover books, the “standard” royalty of 15 percent works out to about 27 to 32 percent of receipts, which in turn, after expenses, splits profits about 50/50 between author and publisher.
A 50/50 split of profits is fair. But that’s not the same as a 50/50 split of receipts. One day soon, e-publishing won’t be all gravy. It will be the way we publish books. And all the costs associated with publishing books (minus the printing and other costs that printed books incur but ebooks don’t) will have to factored into ebook pricing and royalty calculations.
You can bet that publishers are already factoring the future into their calculations as they set their 25 percent of receipts royalty schedules. Nobody can accurately predict the future though, and publishers are giving themselves ample padding.
The issue we need to address is how should receipts between publisher and author be split to account for a future where ebooks are a big chunk of the books sold? The goal should be that, after publishers’ costs are covered, authors and publishers share the profits 50/50.
The percentage of receipts authors would get with a fair (50/50 profit) royalty system is not 25 percent of receipts. But it’s not 50 percent of receipts either.
– Anita Bartholomew