The Nook and Borrowing Digital Books
Image via The New York Times
Barnes and Noble released the Nook, its very own digital reader a few days ago and so far the reactions have been pretty good. It looks good, has a touch screen and appears to be user friendly. The screen displays the same gray and black, with shades of darker colors to create shadow and depth as the Amazon Kindle.
But one feature of the new device has rattled a few of the expectant fans. This is the lending feature of the Nook, which lets one Nook user share a book with another Nook user. The catch, and everyone should have seen this coming, is that one can only lend a book once to another person and only for a period of 14 days. When the lender has lent the book they also will not be able to view the book.
Therefore the lending feature has limits, and it should. But it should only because there is no ideal way to make a strong profit yet in the digital book world. Accusations of greed were tossed out by those who do not agree with the strictures of the feature. While I think that claim is going overboard (it’s not greed, it’s simply taking advantage of the profitability of a new technology), there is some weight to the argument that lending a book only once in its digital lifetime is a bit strict. It makes one wary of who they share it with. And 14 days is not enough time to lend a book. Your going to get through a hefty text in 14 days? Reading should be a pleasure not a timed race. Plus, part of the joy of physical books is that one can lend them ad infinitum until they return to you (or do not) as tattered, happy texts. But there is no future in this type of generous lending for digital book publishers.
The Nook is a jump in the right direction, but it shows that there are still improvements to be made in the digital book world. Though I am sure this idea has been floated and rejected, or maybe it does exist, but what about a monthly subscription plan for books? Basically it would be a Netflix for books. Netflix has been very successful with its platform and now that e-readers are essentially the same as our TV’s and computers at home, one should be able to rent books, pay a fee per month and share them with a selected group of people who are also members of the same system. It would combine social networking with digital book rental. You’d of course also have the option to buy the book digitally from the company, but sharing it would in incur a slight charge. Not as much as buying the book, however. One should be able to share rented books as many times as one wants, but only with those people in your “circle” on the system. Time would be limited on this sharing as well, but to a far greater time period than 14 days. Books one buys would also be limited to sharing with members of their network online.
If this already exists, let me know because I’d want in.
via A New Electronic Reader, the Nook, Enters the Market.
Related articles by Zemanta
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
I have to say, I agree with the idea that you should be able to re-lend the book; on the other hand, that they are basically forced to return it to you is kind of a novel idea, given how many things we lend in our lives that we never get back!
Michael,
Books are made for lending. It’s insane not to be able to lend them, but digitally they haven’t figured it out yet. It’s better than lending the whole nook to your friend, as if it was a book.
In response to another comment. See in context »I say the more re-lending the better. My family has always behaved more like a close-knit book club, and, aside from giving me a love for reading from a very young age, sharing literature has always given us a strong common interest. I can’t tell you how many times we’ve discussed Michner’s portrayal of our home state or the connundrum of being Catholic Dan Brown fans over holiday meals. And I’ll never forget how proud I was to finally break into the club and have my favorite book circulate around the family for the first time (in case you’re curious I was 19, and it was The Kiterunner). In short, turning books into those “tattered, happy texts” with a group of people who matter to you is as much an appeal to reading as the story itself, and until digital books incorporate that into their business model, print will always win. Well, at least in my family.
LeeAnn,
This is exactly where the social networking aspect of a subscription book lender and seller could come in handy. It could bring the friend part in with digital reading. The only thing that would be missing would be the used books that got lots of reading love.
It’s great that your family shared books so energetically.
In response to another comment. See in context »i dig the netflix idea- you can have it as long as you’d like but noone else can view it during that time? I mean- a real tattered book is the same way- if you want to lend it to someone else you actually have to request it back from them.
however since the separation from physical analog good to digital is so blurry and “restrictive” to most people, this will not be the case and someone will mostly likely crack any protection quickly.
i really love the idea of ereaders and the fact that there are new ones bseides the kindle coming out is great- the thing that is daunting to analog readers is that unlike mp3 players where cd/record/tape owners had the option of putting their preexisting music onto their players- there really isn’t any option to get our old books on there is there? This seems to make the adoption curve much more difficult as we would only be buying future books on the readers until some super scanner or purchase/receipt program is implemented. i love that my home is filled with books but the thought of all the extra space created by not having books is far larger than getting rid of my cds….vinyl however
Eisnein,
I haven’t thought this idea out thoroughly but I think if you share it you should not be able to read it at the same time. It will be truer to the limits of analog books.
It’s a good point about your old books not being on digital readers. But Google is trying to take care of that with their highly debated books project.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by terryvanhorn, faye herl. faye herl said: The Nook and Borrowing Digital Books: True/Slant The screen displays the same gray and black, with shades of da.. http://bit.ly/eAXg1 [...]
“Though I am sure this idea has been floated and rejected, or maybe it does exist, but what about a monthly subscription plan for books? Basically it would be a Netflix for books.”
Have you ever heard of public libraries? They know offer patrons to download digital e-books and audio books from such sites as NetLibrary and Overdrive.com . And it’s free. Granted the titles and formats aren’t that extensive in most areas, but they’re growing every year. New York Public Library now has over 18,000 e-book titles for example.
Of course e-reader companies should be able to make a profit, but at the same time they are ineffectively trying to out do a technology that has been wildly successful for over a thousand years, the print book. Face it, why are print books so popular? They’re easy to use, borrow them, trade them, sell them, make photocopies of sections, etc. You cannot do these things with e-books because of digital rights management issues. And because of all this, why do companies think consumers would want to pay out $259 for a single task device that doesn’t guarentee complete ownership rights of the content you purchase and store on it? Most people are smart enough to spend their money on a mulipurpose device like a netbook / pda or stick with buying and borrowing print books. Until publishers loosen up their policies, e-books will NEVER be really profitable.
Murphybrow,
Libraries are great resources, but for people who want to make a profit, as you say, there have to be other plans in place.
Good point about the technology replacing something that has been around for a thousand years, at least. Print books are easier to use but more people are sitting in front of digital screens these days, so one has to go where the people are. Physical books are not going to go away, but the audience should be expanding not shrinking, and it will take a little dynamism to increase that audience.
In response to another comment. See in context »I definately agree with you that e-books have a lot of potential to enhance the reading experience as well as an exciting new medium for writers. And yes more things are moving to digital, but reading a long article or book is very difficult to read on an LCD screen. Beyond eyestrain, screen reading forces or eyes to skim vertically down a page after reading for long periods of time rather than reading horizontally right to left.
E-ink screens in Kindles are thus a wonderful achievement in e-reader technology, but Amazon unfortunately keeps a very tight grip on what content can be viewed on their devices and what rights a person has to act on the content they have purchased. B&N seems to be easing up more than Amazon, but still seems to be having issues with allowing their customers more freedom to choose how use their devices.
It seems like a read Catch 22 – on the one hand, companies like B&N or Amazon could loosen restrictings and thus attract more users to their e-book fold by adapting their product to how people already use their owned print books, or in a methodical way to maximize profit maintain these restrictions and hope consumers will buy the product more out of its novelty than its functionality. I think the earlier option would make more sense because it would be investing expanding their market and building upon customer loyalty. Since they’re not only selling a device, but a service, these companies need to follow the example of Apple and i-tunes for allowing greater user freedom over the material they buy.
In response to another comment. See in context »Murphybrow,
Excellently put. I am all for increasing readership, no matter what device the reading is being done on. We just need more readers in this world.
Profits for the companies are important and they do have to find a away to keep producing books and selling books but increase readership simultaneously. It is indeed a Reading Catch 22.
Thanks for your commenting.
In response to another comment. See in context »Lets not forget one of the reasons books are so great is selling them allows some money to flow back to the writer — not enough, of course. I think lots of the schemes floating around, like subscriptions or a universal e-library, may make it easier for readers but they only profit the e-book maker at the expense of the writers. Just my 2-cents … no make that 1-cent … nah, its all free anyway.
Todd,
Great point. As a writer myself who hopes to have a few books out there one day, it is essential that the writer receive a decent salary for his or her work. It’s often the problem that professions that are considered art are not compensated properly. Self publishing does offer some advantages in this way, the writer is more connected to the process and the profit if there is any. The drawback is that you don’t have the support or influence of the publishing company to work for you.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] big advantages cited for the Nook is that their model of ‘e-books’ includes a scheme to permit me to lend my e-book (the book not the device) to someone else. This is a start. But the one who takes that the next [...]