mckitterick (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
mckitterick) wrote2007-05-17 11:51 am
mckitterick) wrote2007-05-17 11:51 am
Entry tags:
giving away your writing: what does the future hold?
There's lots of discussion of late among SFWAns about giving writing away for free online, with various arguments against it. One is that it hurts those trying to make a living at writing.
My own experience shows that posting parts of works online helps develop interest among readers and create potential new readers. For example, I've given away most of my previously published poetry, because, well, it's not as if I'm getting rich from poetry. Because I did this, a singer-songwriter decided to turn one of the poems into a song, thereby allowing the poem to earn more than it ever could have in print.
I worked for Microsoft as a writer years ago, before electronic publishing was a big deal. My team, the Server Resource Kit, wanted to give away our documentation for free to the Server customers because, well, they're big-dollar customers and supporting them is expensive. The main argument was that we should give them the info they need in advance to save Help-Desk calls later, plus it builds customer satisfaction (you might see this as "reader loyalty" from the fiction-writer's perspective). Microsoft Press, our paper publisher, fought tooth-and-nail against the idea because they made something like $50 million/year from the Resource Kit. Because Server made several $billions/year, Press lost that argument. A memorable exchange: [Server V.P.]: "Fifty million?" He reaches into his pocket and pulls out some coins. "We earn Xbillion a year. Fifty million is pocket change."
And you know what? We sold more printed books after giving them away than before.
Just a couple of anecdotes.
Sure, I fear the coming of electronic publication, because look what's happened to the music industry when music went digital and people started sharing songs with their friends (read: "ripping and giving away free copies"). But a lot of new musicians are now getting recognized because of people stealing and sharing music.
How will things turn out for individual artists when all information finds a way to be free? Will artists be able to make a living doing their work in the near future?
What are your thoughts?
Chris
My own experience shows that posting parts of works online helps develop interest among readers and create potential new readers. For example, I've given away most of my previously published poetry, because, well, it's not as if I'm getting rich from poetry. Because I did this, a singer-songwriter decided to turn one of the poems into a song, thereby allowing the poem to earn more than it ever could have in print.
I worked for Microsoft as a writer years ago, before electronic publishing was a big deal. My team, the Server Resource Kit, wanted to give away our documentation for free to the Server customers because, well, they're big-dollar customers and supporting them is expensive. The main argument was that we should give them the info they need in advance to save Help-Desk calls later, plus it builds customer satisfaction (you might see this as "reader loyalty" from the fiction-writer's perspective). Microsoft Press, our paper publisher, fought tooth-and-nail against the idea because they made something like $50 million/year from the Resource Kit. Because Server made several $billions/year, Press lost that argument. A memorable exchange: [Server V.P.]: "Fifty million?" He reaches into his pocket and pulls out some coins. "We earn Xbillion a year. Fifty million is pocket change."
And you know what? We sold more printed books after giving them away than before.
Just a couple of anecdotes.
Sure, I fear the coming of electronic publication, because look what's happened to the music industry when music went digital and people started sharing songs with their friends (read: "ripping and giving away free copies"). But a lot of new musicians are now getting recognized because of people stealing and sharing music.
How will things turn out for individual artists when all information finds a way to be free? Will artists be able to make a living doing their work in the near future?
What are your thoughts?
Chris
no subject
And this is why the Baen model that is DRM-free works so well. They do every one of their books in every imaginable e-format.
Worse, the parent company that owns Tor decided that skinning the reader was a Good Thing. They had an arrangement with Baen, and then decided to price their e-material at 19.95 a shot, when all of us know that their costs were not going to be anywhere *near* high enough to justify their highway robbery. They pulled out in terror at a DRM free universe. Teh stupid, it burns!!
no subject
So if there are DRM-free models that are working, that's terrific. If people can maintain a culture where distributing the books for free is viewed as wrong and ripping authors off, that's really the best answer in the end.
Overcharging for electronic files is something I think is killing more than one format. I'd rather have my movies on my hard drive, but I'm not going to spend the same price or more to download them and miss out on the special features. Charge me $5 a movie, and I'd probably buy several per month.
I'd rather listen to audio books than the radio on my drive to and from work, but I'm not willing to pay $40 for a book. Charge me the same price as a paperback, and I'll be buying them instead of checking out audio CDs from the library. I realize production costs are more for audio books, but still...
I've got a few e-books, but they're really just not the same. The screen is still too small and the display still to pixelated. I do like that the bookmarks never fall out and that I can non destructively annotate.