Authors Guild vs Amazon

(image credit)

The Authors Guild recently sent a sharply worded message to Amazon about the online retailer’s lending program: Contracts on Fire: Amazon's Lending Library Mess. It’s a complex question of economics and content, in light of the ongoing (r)evolution of online retailing and digital publishing. But I hope I can add a bit of clarity here.

If in fact there has been a breach of contract, as the Authors Guild contends, then obviously Amazon has to be held accountable. Beyond this, however, I wouldn’t advise taking an adversarial approach. The battle over content is sometimes waged as creators vs. aggregators vs. distributors (and sometimes vs. consumers, too). Because they all need each other, and are therefore intricately linked, defeating one constituency in this battle sends negative ripples across the whole pond.

So, how to go forward?

Well, the concern by major publishers over Amazon’s lending program is the impact on sales, as the Wall Street Journal reports in Amazon, Now a Book Lender. But such concern ought not result in categorical refusal to participate. Rather, it ought to prompt continued efforts at finding alternative options, workable strategies, and better economics. Perhaps the preferred option by one party isn’t realistic in this scenario, but I am certain there are more outcomes that are reasonable and agreeable.

To this end, consider the following:

Despite concerns among major publishers about the potential impact on sales of the program, some see it as a positive. Arthur Klebanoff, chief executive of RosettaBooks LLC, an e-book publisher that is making Mr. Covey’s title available under a flat-fee arrangement, said he did so because he believes it will spur sales of Mr. Covey’s other works.

“I’m attracted to the incremental promotion/visibility for participating titles,” he said. “All site promotion, especially of backlist titles, drives sales in the Kindle Store.” Mr. Klebanoff said that he’s providing about 200 titles in all.

Whether the Authors Guild likes it or not, Amazon has amazing reach to those coveted content consumers. By playing hardball like this, it positions itself to win the (contractual) battle but risks losing the (market) war. Again, because they fundamentally need each other, effective collaborations at least offers them the opportunities that Klebanoff is eyeing!

Note: I wrote this article on November 16th 2011 for an old Media & Tech blog.