The rights and wrongs of digital books

4 November 2010, Last updated at 14: 16 GMT buy an e-book and all you get is a license to try, says Bill Thompson.

Reading onscreen is getting more like reading a book, says Bill Thompson

The recent rapid growth of the market for electronic editions of contemporary fiction, with some titles selling more digital markets in what they do in printed form, it seems unlikely to the queue. The second part of 2010 could mark the starting point to future historians date the transition towards reading on the screen for literary fiction, as well as reference works.

Amazon recently announced that in September has sold more Kindle books that print books for the top ten bestselling books, one hundred and one thousand also on its website applicable U.S. and other resellers will undoubtedly see the same as Christmas nears.

Page Turner

All persons involved in the trading book, as you probably will continue to call for some years, trying to decide how to respond to this change and anticipate the impending arrival of the sort of creative destruction that has crossed the music industry, but few seem to have many good ideas.

Independent publishers Faber & Faber and Canongate, both of whom spend time talking about the impact of the digital publishing (although not for money), are trying hard to remain relevant and initiatives such as the new electronic publishing service, Faber, factory are a sign that they understand the evolution of the market.

However, still have not yet prepared to accept that the price of electronic texts is too high, and that readers will not pay the same for a bunch of bits as they do for a book bound, since the market knows that costs less than sending electrons in a network than it does to buy the paper, make books out of it and ship physical objects in the world.

Continue reading the main story

we should not allow the right to treat the products of creative expression in the same way as physical property "

end quote Bill Thompson also seem unprepared for fundamental change in the basis of their business that brings digital distribution on all.

When the text of a book is peeled away from the physical book, exposing the important distinction between the law applies to the property and copyright, and this has significant implications for publishers how to make money-or even if they do not all something important happens.

When you buy a book it takes ownership of the pulp, ink and glue that make up the object, and anyone taking away from you without your permission is theft. But I don't own and never owned the copyright.

If the author is still living or died less than 70 years ago, then this list of words and punctuation in this exact order, can be protected in various ways, by limiting the ability to play some or all of the list.

When you buy a digital copy to read on your e-book reader, phone or laptop all you get is the bit copyrighted, and what you pay for is a license to have a copy or copies of the text.

You are not an object "owners"-everything you need is an agreement, and the things you can do with it is limited by copyright law and the terms of this legal agreement that you enter in the licence when you make your purchase.

Kindle and iPad users are well aware of this, because the system of digital rights management used to limit copying of books purchased and makes it impossible to share with a friend in the way we are all accustomed to do with physical books, while the license makes it impossible to sell our e-Book bargain to others and cover the cost of new purchases.

List of loan

Amazon recently announced it will Kindle owners "lend" books, but only for two weeks and once for each title. Expected to clearly get a lot of positive publicity to follow the approach of other e-book readers such as Barnes and noble "nook", but all they did is to highlight exactly what we're giving as we move from buying books to content licensing for our digital devices.

Limits on lending rights might affect libraries

Perhaps worst of all the new features is that Amazon will give publishers a veto on the sharing of their titles. For a company with a reputation for push publishers into distribution deals that are very difficult to work with, Amazon seems to be very careful not to do anything that might upset holders.

When the new Kindle shipped with a feature that let him read text aloud in a voice synthesis which took only a few huffs and puffs from angry Guild we author before the plant has been made optional, to be turned off by Publisher.

And now Amazon is careful to announce aspects editor respectful of his new feature, highlighting the fact that when you pay your money for an edition of Kindle is not buying a book and certainly not buying an e-Book that is in no way equivalent to a printed code.

I would be happy with a system that would allow me to transfer my purchases, rather than sharing them-I don't expect my a download a copy of the new Jonathan Frantzen to provide for the needs of reading my entire extended family at the same time, but loan my Kindle-or in this case my iPad-means loan every book (and every other application), which is not the same as the only loan a book.

There is a point of light in all this, though. Amazon's business model gives us the clearest demonstration of may not let the right to treat the products of creative expression in the same way as physical property.

The idea of "intellectual property" deliberately encompasses two and allows politicians to pretend that the physical property laws should extend to digital downloads. We need to challenge this elision unconscionable if we want to think seriously about business models and copyright in the electronic age.

Bill Thompson is an independent journalist and regular commentator on the BBC World Service Digital Planet. Is currently working with the BBC on its draft archive.