A study released at the top of this month found that e-lending at public libraries could be having a negative effect on the book market. In other words? Your Kindle has some explaining to do.
Commissioned by the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and the Authors Guild, the “[E]mpirical Study of the Impact of Library E-Lending on the Book Economy” found that “increased digital access to e-books through library apps” is influencing consumer behavior. Thanks to the boom in digital check-outs, commercial markets are seeing a slump.
This “threat” specifically affects the new book marketplace—especially during those first weeks right out of the pub gate, when a book’s commercial potential is set. The study found that the relative ease of digital lending is sending readers away from the store and into the stacks. For if someone can simply check out an e-book instead of buying the hardcover—why wouldn’t they?
But wait, you begin to protest. Couldn’t we say the same about any library book, which is by definition at cross-hairs with the “commercial market?” (And anyway, isn’t that sort of the point of the library?)
The “Empirical” report argues that the digital marketplace presents a unique conundrum because of its soaring popularity. Data cited in the study shows that e-books now account for nearly half of many libraries’ collections—and all arrows point up.
On the flip side, e-books aren’t necessarily easy gets for our friends in the stacks. Unlike the physical copy, a library doesn’t technically own its e-book; they pay for a license, which will expire after a certain number of checkouts. At this point, rights revert back to the publisher. Necessitating another purchase of the same book.
Because this practice has proven financially stressful for libraries, some states—see Maryland back in 2022—have attempted to make digital titles easier to access by removing controls on the distribution, purchasing, and pricing of e- and audiobook licenses.
Though such policies are great on paper, authors of the “Empirical” report conclude they’re also part of the problem. Because when licensing fees go down, so does publisher profit. Not to mention the quandary price-lopping presents from a copyright perspective.
So far, the courts agree with the money guys. Which means that even as e-books become more popular, their licensing fees may continue to chew into both publisher profit margins and physical library budgets. If you’ve recently experienced a weirdly long hold wait for a new release, this could be part of the reason.
Where does this all leave you and your Kindle or Kobo? Well, it’s hard to say.
On the one hand, everyone who supports their public library should get a cookie, in my book. But same goes for those of you who buy books from your local indie. Most likely, if you’re still reading this piece on Lit Hub dot com, you do a little of both.
The evidence suggests that digital lending as currently practiced is one more blight for the book industry, yes. But the problem with the report’s framing is it runs the risk of shifting blame for a systemic problem onto the humble reader. Or worse, the library, that paragon of a public good.
As Jane Friedman noted on a Substack this spring, we should be suspicious of any analysis that punts the flagging profit problem back to the consumer. (A-hem, reader.) Especially because the real villain is always Am*zon—the company that pioneered the current, imperfect business model for digital sales in the first place.
A short-term solution? More funding for libraries. (Evergreen; duh.) Because if states can pay higher premiums for books and share the wealth of their contents, it seems like everyone should be happy. Higher e-book pricing also seems plausibly good, from the publisher’s perspective.
This is one of those problems where the answer is more—readers, writers, licenses, and books of all modes.
