Give a Bitch Your Opinion

We’ve talked about ARCs for sale on eBay, and the proper things to do with an ARC- used book store donation, charity donation, elderly home donation. Now I have a question, and I’m honestly asking. I’m not trying to be a smart ass. So feel free to tell me, “Oh you are so so misguided, you Smart Bitch, you.”

I have a good number of ARCs ranging in publishing date from December 2006 through April 2007, and while I am reading them and making notes for review, I can’t possibly keep them all. I’d need to build an addition on the house. For the record, books sent to me by an author specifically are not part of what I’m proposing.

My synagogue hosts an annual charity auction of donated goods to raise money for synagogue activities. The charity auction is hosted online (not at eBay but at a similar site that hosts nothing but charity auctions) and is available through April, with a big event on May 5 where the goods from the online auction are delivered, and there’s also a live auction and party to celebrate that oh-so-Jewish holiday, Cinco de Mayo. As a Spanish-speaking Jew, I’m all about this party.

My question is as follows: is it inappropriate for me to take the ARCs of books that, by the time of the auction, will already have been published, put them in a basket with a beach towel, some sunscreen, and a water bottle, and auction it off as a “Summer Beach Reading Basket?” Or would that be too close to “selling the ARC,” despite the proceeds going to a 501(c)3 not-for-profit?

I’m curious what you think – and what other altruistic ways we could redirect ARC copies for maximum benefit.

Categorized:

Random Musings

Comments are Closed

  1. Nora Roberts says:

    Robin, just to be clear. Are you actually saying it’s unfair of the publishers and the authors not to provide, for free, arcs to readers who want the book badly enough to pay stiff prices for them on ebay? That it’s somehow the fault of publishers and authors for distributing arcs to reviewers, and for giving a handful (or less) away as prized on blogs? That this is an inequity?

    That because reviewers are given advanced copies for promotion and review of the upcoming book, and some authors hold blog contests for one of their arcs, we’re somehow not being fair—and are precipitating the sale of arcs for often extreme prices?

    That’s how I read your comment, but I could have misunderstood. Because if I read this correctly: “NOT having ARCs available for those readers seems unfair, as, I imagine, does the seeming plethora of ARCs floating around to various reader blog owners to those readers who aren’t on the Penguin (or whatever) ARC mailing list” to be fair publishers and writers should not provide review copies at all—or should provide them to all—gratis.

  2. TrainerJen says:

    That’s not at all how I made it sound, my words are being twisted (happens alot, don’t worry about it).

    I said nothing about those women not having free will or control. I damn well had the control not to give into this pusher’s monetary demands for his ARCs (BTW…the STARTING bid..that the SELLER sets…was 52 dollars…TWICE what the book goes for retail). What I said is that the temptation wouldn’t have been there if it weren’t for this guy. This guy who had NOTHING to do with the writing, sale, or distribution of this book. They weren’t his words. They weren’t his BOOK. They weren’t even his bought property (because he for DAMN sure didn’t pay anything for them).

    Who give’s a rat’s ass if a few ninnies prance around bragging that they’ve read a book in advance? No skin off my butt. But, said butt certainly gets chapped when some random guy is profiting from my friends, as well as an author I respect and admire, simply because he’s got the brain cells to be an ebay seller.

    As I said. Bookstores don’t get to sell a friggin’ book before the streetdate, why the hell should some moron on ebay get to? I’m just confused.

  3. Robin says:

    That’s not at all how I made it sound, my words are being twisted (happens alot, don’t worry about it).

    I said nothing about those women not having free will or control. I damn well had the control not to give into this pusher’s monetary demands for his ARCs (BTW…the STARTING bid..that the SELLER sets…was 52 dollars…TWICE what the book goes for retail). What I said is that the temptation wouldn’t have been there if it weren’t for this guy.

    Jen, here is the part of your comments I was responding to:  I know of a couple of women who paid that exorbatant amount, because this installment of the series was purported to be a doozy . . . But it sure as hell wouldn’t have happened if this guy hadn’t been selling ARC’s on ebay like a freaking dealer on a corner.

    How is that not a cause/effect statement—especially your phrase “it wouldn’t have happened if . . . “?

  4. Robin says:

    Are you actually saying it’s unfair of the publishers and the authors not to provide, for free, arcs to readers who want the book badly enough to pay stiff prices for them on ebay? That it’s somehow the fault of publishers and authors for distributing arcs to reviewers, and for giving a handful (or less) away as prized on blogs? That this is an inequity?

    I’m not sure how far I’m willing to go yet with this line of thought.  But it has occurred to me more than once during these discussions that before eBay, and before the online Romance community, that all this hubbub over selling ARCs for tons of money before the street date of a book wasn’t so pronounced.  And it also occurred to me that reader bloggers are often commenting on how they get to read certain books ahead of time, and how great they are, etc. etc., which I can imagine might make die-hard fans of certain authors want to get their hands on said book ASAP.  And that eBay provides a market for some readers who have the money and the desire to pay for that privilege and who don’t win an ARC in a contest, etc. 

    But seriously, how many MORE readers know about ARCs since all the attention to them has been paid to them in the online Romance community?  When a reader “wins” an ARC, aren’t they supposed to think they’re getting something special?  Something valuable?  Something that other readers DON’T get? 

    I don’t know where all that goes, exactly, but IMO it complicates that argument that everything is going to hell in a handbasket because of a few people on eBay (and I notice that no one is pointing fingers at the publisher for perhaps loading certain sellers up with these extra ARCs). 

    It seems to me there are some interesting paradoxes in the great ARC debate.  On the one hand, authors feel these books are inferior because they are not final copies.  They further feel that these eBay sellers are making money off their (your) backs.  Readers, OTOH, seem to view ARCs as superior somehow (primarily, I think, because they allow the reader to read a book early).  And in a sense, ARCs are simultaneously more and less valuable than the final copy of the book.  The more there are in distribution, of course, the less “rare” they are, and the more people have access to them.  But the publicity from increased distribution of ARCs is MORE valuable.  Vice versa with fewer ARCs (rarer and more valuable per se) and perhaps less promotional power. 

    My feeling is that ARCs serve an essential purpose in promoting an author’s work and name, and that they should be given freely as promotional gifts.  But by the same token, I think they should therefore be seen as fair game for someone who wants to sell them on eBay, IF he/she has a lawfully obtained copy.

  5. TrainerJen says:

    I didn’t say it wasn’t cause and effect. It absolutely is. Actually, we’re arguing the same point, albeit on opposite sides.

    Sure it’s “cause and effect” and the women I know who did this weren’t in the wrong, but they sure were stupid, IMO.

    My point is, yes, “it wouldn’t have happened if…” This guy hadn’t been riding the coattails of an author’s popularity. An author I truely respect and admire. And to tell the truth, if it were ANY author, it would get my panties in a wad.

    This guy had NOTHING to do with this book. Nothing. Zip. Zero. Zilch. He didn’t even buy it in the first place. Legalities aside, can you tell me WHY this guy isn’t a sleazebag?

  6. Nora Roberts says:

    (and I notice that no one is pointing fingers at the publisher for perhaps loading certain sellers up with these extra ARCs). 

    Because they don’t. Someone IN the publishing house who loads up, or passes a load off to a pal is an entirely different thing. And, imo, they’re crossing the line.

    The issue seems complicated enough without fogging it up with the inaccurate notion that publishers push armloads of a single arc on any individual reviewer or bookseller. I’ve never heard of this in all of my 26 years in the business.

    My husband’s bookstore routinely receives arcs from various publishers. ONE copy of a title for the store. Period.

    Argue the legality, the ethics, fine. But to speculate that the publishers and the authors are unfair, and at fault, because they gift bunches of an arc title to someone and don’t offer them as gifts to eager readers who’ll then fork over big bucks to ebay is just ludicrous.

    I’m responsible for Sally Reader spending 300 bucks for one of my arcs on ebay because I gave Nancy Reader the arc as a doorprize at a signing?

    I don’t think so.

  7. Robin says:

    Argue the legality, the ethics, fine. But to speculate that the publishers and the authors are unfair, and at fault, because they gift bunches of an arc title to someone and don’t offer them as gifts to eager readers who’ll then fork over big bucks to ebay is just ludicrous.

    See, for me it’s not an issue of *fault* at all.  In the same way that I don’t see someone selling lawfully obtained ARCs on eBay as per se unethical, I don’t blame authors and publishers for giving out ARCs to anyone they see as a conduit to greater promotion.  But I DO see that whole ARC marketplace as having an effect on the more general marketplace in which readers can obtain ARCs through sellers on eBay. 

    The difference is that you see that as an accusation of nefarious doing on the part of authors and publishers because of your view of those eBay sales as unethical.  That is your right, but my disagreement with that position doesn’t make me wrong, unethical, or “ludicrous,” it just means we disagree—again.

    Because I don’t see those sales as inherently bad—but rather as an effect of a certain market demand and availability—I don’t see my drawing of these connections as accusatory or negative in any way.  I just see it as all about the factors that create and shape a commercial market for ARCs.  And absolutely, I do think online dynamics have played a role in creating that marketplace (and I’m not just talking about eBay). 

    If someone in a publishing house is giving out ARCs contrary to company policy, that’s a whole different thing—why blame the seller and not the individual supplier?  And is it, in fact, against policy for someone to give out a pile of ARCs?  It seems to me that’s between the publisher and the employee in question. The employee’s obligation is to the publisher, not to the author, right?  I wonder, too, outside of wanting to accomodate an author who protests sales of her/his ARCs how much a publisher would or wouldn’t care about such sales (especially if they created more promotional buzz around an impending release).

  8. Marta Acosta says:

    I think the reason people buy ARCs are !1) they’re frequently getting them cheaper, or 2) they’re impatient to read the book and we live in an instant gratification society.

    I generally check with a reviewer FIRST before sending an ARC.  I have a limited amount so I don’t intend to give them to someone who will just turn around and sell it for personal profit.  It’s the same sellers on Ebay all the time.  They’ve sold hundreds or thousands of ARCs and this is their business.

    As Nora said, publishers only give one ARC to each bookseller. ARCs cost money to produce, money to package, and money to ship.  Anyone who’s getting multiple copies and reselling them is probably stealing them.

    “And it also occurred to me that reader bloggers are often commenting on how they get to read certain books ahead of time, and how great they are, etc. etc., which I can imagine might make die-hard fans of certain authors want to get their hands on said book ASAP.” 

    Yes, this is the purpose of giving ARCs—creating a positive buzz for the book.  When readers are eager to read the book before the release date, the ARC has served its purpose.

    “And that eBay provides a market for some readers who have the money and the desire to pay for that privilege and who don’t win an ARC in a contest, etc.”

    EBay also provides a market for people who sell fake Rolexes, illegal DVDs, and tons of fake McCoy pottery.  The people who buy these things don’t want to pay full price and feel like they’re getting a, well, steal.

    I’m not going to suffer if someone sells an ARC, but writers with smaller houses may well be paying for these on their own and when they are diverted to EBay for someone’s personal profit, they do suffer.

    I don’t understand the level of hostility toward publishers and writers on this issue.  I would think that fans would want to support writers and support publishing houses.

    And if there’s an ethical question, why not err on the side of decency?  There’s nothing to stop a devoted and impoverished fan from writing to her favorite author and ASKING for an ARC.

  9. Nora Roberts says:

    Robin, you said, quite clearly, it was unfair that arcs weren’t available to readers who want to read the book ahead of time, when they’re available to others. You said it brought home the inequities between those provided with them, and those who aren’t.

    How am I do take that as not placing fault on the publishers and the authors? We’re the ones not fairly handing them out to all who want them, rather than to a select few.

    I find the statement foolish. It’s the same as saying it’s unfair if I win a pair of tickets to a concert in a radio promotion, and someone else goes to a scalper and pays five times the face value for the same tickets. The performer and the people marketing him should have provided enough tickets for everyone who wanted them?

    What if it was a special promotion, and I won a chance to sit in on a rehearsal? Good for me, but what about the woman who paid a thousand to get her hands on a pass for the rehearsal performance? How is the performer or the promoter being unfair or unequitable?

    I have never, not ever, heard of a publisher giving a single reviewer or bookseller loads of copies of an arc. I said this before. So yes, as far as I know, it would be against publisher policy to gift an individual with a bunch of copies.

    And fyi, long before ebay became the thing, my publisher fumed over arcs for sale in bookstores. But as with pretty much everything, the issue is more widespread now with the internet. Not new, just more common.

    AND, when I commented about the multiple copies of my particular arc on ebay, I did speak of the supplier as well as the seller. Both, imo—though they may be one in the same—are wrong.

  10. Robin says:

    I find the statement foolish.

    I love it when you use derogatory terms to describe my points; I actually think it boosts my metabolism, and for that I thank you.

    Robin, you said, quite clearly, it was unfair that arcs weren’t available to readers who want to read the book ahead of time, when they’re available to others. You said it brought home the inequities between those provided with them, and those who aren’t.

    No, that’s not what I said.  What I said is this:  “If anything, the pre-sale of ARCs on eBay just brings home the inequities between those who get to read the book ahead of time for free (and who often brag about it online on their blogs, etc.) and those who don’t—and who have to buy the ARC for that privilege.  NOT having ARCs available for those readers seems unfair, as, I imagine, does the seeming plethora of ARCs floating around to various reader blog owners to those readers who aren’t on the Penguin (or whatever) ARC mailing list.”

    I said two things here (but they are, indeed, related).  I said first that there is an inequity between readers who get to read books in free ARC form ahead of time *and those readers who have to buy them on eBay*.  Then I said that the unavailability of ARCs *seems* unfair to readers who can’t acquire an ARC for free when it appears that so many reader bloggers are getting ARCs and talking up the book on their blog ahead of the publication date.  Because as a casual observer who doesn’t give a flying fig for ARCs (and I happen to be one of those readers who actually enjoys the anticipation of an upcoming book), I can see how what seems to be an awful lot of ARCs floating around blogland might feel unfair to a reader who has to pay for that privilege.  I really do believe that the fact that ARCs are more prevalent and *in view* (through advance promo) on the part of numerous reader bloggers amps up the anticipation on the part of some readers to the point where they will seek out the ARC for purchase.  I have seen readers question why so-and-so gets ARCs, etc., and I think there’s a difference between a site that reviews a book pre-publication and one that involves bragging rights.  Both are great promo for the author, and neither is wrong, IMO, but when you’re talking about fans of an author, the reader blogger, who may seem fewer steps away from the befret reader than the RT book reviewer, has, IMO, a different impact on readers anticipating a book.  It’s not about fault, IMO, or blame, or bad effect—it’s a certain dynamic among fans and the availability of ARCs on the commercial market. I’ve seen it in action numerous times. 

    I find the statement foolish. It’s the same as saying it’s unfair if I win a pair of tickets to a concert in a radio promotion, and someone else goes to a scalper and pays five times the face value for the same tickets. The performer and the people marketing him should have provided enough tickets for everyone who wanted them?

    Apples and oranges, IMO.  In your concert scenario, one can argue equal access for all potential concert goers—or at least equal opportunity to acquire tickets available to the public.  In the ARC scenario, the object is not available on an equal opportunity for acquisition basis.

    I don’t think the selective distribution of ARCs is unfair.  But I also don’t think it’s unfair per se for a seller on eBay to participate in the commercial market for said ARCs (assuming those ARCs are lawfully obtained).  In both cases, IMO, the ARCs are doing their job.

  11. Robin says:

    EBay also provides a market for people who sell fake Rolexes, illegal DVDs, and tons of fake McCoy pottery.  The people who buy these things don’t want to pay full price and feel like they’re getting a, well, steal.

    Well, I think pre-pub ARCs generally go for more than the book price, because at that point they’re a premium product and the potential buyer is a fan of the author and therefore willing to pay premium price for the privilege of reading a book early.  In any case, though, I don’t think that ARC sales and counterfeit designer-ware are analogous, because in only one case something is being passed off as another illegally.

    I’m not going to suffer if someone sells an ARC, but writers with smaller houses may well be paying for these on their own and when they are diverted to EBay for someone’s personal profit, they do suffer.

    But don’t you think it’s primarily the big name authors who have a market for pre-pub ARCs on eBay?

    I don’t understand the level of hostility toward publishers and writers on this issue.  I would think that fans would want to support writers and support publishing houses.

    But shouldn’t readers be allowed to do this on their own terms.  As a reader of historical Romance, for example, I am willing to go a few extra miles to seek out midlist authors and contact publishers about books I love, because as a reader, I suffer when the historical market sucks.  But in the same way I won’t refuse to read an author who does or says something in her public persona that I find irritating or obnoxious, I don’t expect authors to tell me what’s ethical or unethical in my reading habits.  So for me, it’s not about being hostile to publishers or authors, it’s about feeling that my obligations to either are limited, in the same way that their obligations to me are limited.  That you may hate ARC sales I understand; that you may think all such sales are tacky, unethical, etc. I understand.  But I actually didn’t develop a real opinion on this matter until I a) understood the law better, and b) felt I was being lectured by authors who wanted to impose a sense of obligation on readers beyond that which we should reasonably bear, IMO.  All of a sudden I went from feeling sympathetic in a sort of knee-jerk way to really asking myself what I thought readers were and weren’t responsible for (as well as eBay sellers).

  12. Nora Roberts says:

    “Robin, you said, quite clearly, it was unfair that arcs weren’t available to readers who want to read the book ahead of time, when they’re available to others. You said it brought home the inequities between those provided with them, and those who aren’t.”

    No, that’s not what I said.  What I said is this:  “If anything, the pre-sale of ARCs on eBay just brings home the inequities between those who get to read the book ahead of time for free (and who often brag about it online on their blogs, etc.) and those who don’t—and who have to buy the ARC for that privilege.  NOT having ARCs available for those readers seems unfair, as, I imagine, does the seeming plethora of ARCs floating around to various reader blog owners to those readers who aren’t on the Penguin (or whatever) ARC mailing list.”

    I honestly can’t see the difference between these two statements.

    And for the record, I’ve never criticized the reader for buying arcs. My criticisms have always been directed at the seller.

  13. Marta Acosta says:

    “But don’t you think it’s primarily the big name authors who have a market for pre-pub ARCs on eBay?”

    No.  If you actually look at the ARC sales on EBay, they are across the board and ARCs by mid-list authors sell for well below bookstore prices.  These are long-term businesses that make their money off dollars and dimes.

    If the ARCs are acquired through shady means, such as someone in a distribution center taking numerous copies in their tote bag, or someone pretending to be a reviewer in order to get them, I think this “business” is as unethical as fake McCoys.

    “But shouldn’t readers be allowed to do this on their own terms.”

    Yes, readers can express their support by buying copies from legitimate outlets, or express their lack of support by buying ARCs.

    “But I actually didn’t develop a real opinion on this matter until I a) understood the law better, and b) felt I was being lectured by authors who wanted to impose a sense of obligation on readers beyond that which we should reasonably bear, IMO.”

    I don’t think authors are “imposing a sense of obligation.”  Authors are explaining their viewpoints and the economic realities of publishing to readers.  I’d think that a fan who was so devoted that she’d spend hundreds of dollars on an ARC might be interested in that sort of thing.

    I got into this discussion when it’d already been raging the first or second go round.  It’s gone from:  “Is it legal to resell ARCs?,” a serious inquiry, to attacks on publishers for being “unfair” about giving out ARCs to some people.

  14. Robin says:

    I honestly can’t see the difference between these two statements.

    I think I’ve been clear, but I’ll try one more time.

    I absolutely do think there’s an inequity between people who get ARCs for free and people who buy them at 100+ bucks a pop on eBay.  I personally think those prices are unfair.  But not all inequities should or can be resolved, and at least the market on eBay provides some access for readers who are desperate to get an ARC and who can’t otherwise get one.  Are they any more or less entitled to that ARC than anyone else who receives one?  That might be an interesting area for debate.  But if that sold ARC results in increased promotion for the author, then the ARC is still doing its job, IMO.

    As for the issue of fairness (because I can see how this can get out of control fast), you think I’m saying it’s unfair that some readers don’t get ARCs.  I’m not.  I’m saying instead that I can understand how some readers who don’t get free ARCs feel that way, because from the POV of a die hard fan, ARC distribution can *seem* unfair (especially with the errant ‘I get so many ARCs I end up throwing them in the trash’ comments). I’ve seen comments by readers articulating this position, especially as more reader bloggers get and talk about the ARCs they receive.  I’ve heard stories from people who say that they or people they know have gotten tons of ARCs they don’t even want, let alone that they might review.

    Does that mean I think every reader should be able to get an ARC, let alone a free ARC?  No.  It just means that the system of distributing ARCs can appear unfair when some readers so desperately want them that they are willing to pay big bucks on eBay and others are so uninterested in them that they will sell them, dump them in the trash, etc.  But that’s how it is, and IMO, that’s one of the reasons there is a commercial market for ARCs.

    I’ll restrain myself from arguing that the reader who pays big money for the ARC loses far more than the author. It’s a nice, dramatic finish, but I’m not sure I feel that way, because if a reader wants to pay that much for an ARC, then apparently it’s worth it to that reader.

  15. Robin says:

    If you actually look at the ARC sales on EBay, they are across the board and ARCs by mid-list authors sell for well below bookstore prices.  These are long-term businesses that make their money off dollars and dimes.

    Then these are post-pub copies?  That the author would never have seen a dime from anyway?  That otherwise might go into the trash somewhere?  That amount to an infinitesimal fraction of said author’s books in the marketplace?

    “But shouldn’t readers be allowed to do this on their own terms.”

    Yes, readers can express their support by buying copies from legitimate outlets, or express their lack of support by buying ARCs.

    But see, to me this still sounds like it’s on your terms.  I just can’t get behind any insinuation that a reader who buys ARCs isn’t supporting an author or publisher; in fact, in many, many cases, especially where a reader is paying more than sticker price for an ARC, I think it’s exactly the opposite.

    IMO you have an absolute right to hate ARC sales, but that doesn’t mean it’s *objectively* or inarguably unethical to sell or buy ARCs.

  16. Jane says:

    So I was writing my ebook weekly article yesterday and today and I was thinking that ebook arcs are such a good way to go.  Publisher could “lend” an ebook reader to a reviewer with a signed agreement covering the use.  The reviewer signs on to publisher website and downloads the book that she or he wants to read.  The publisher can track this.  The ebook can’t be printed, sold or shared because of the proprietary software.  It could even be time activated – i.e., after a certain period of time the book access would expire (like at the time of the release date) so that if the reviewer wanted his or her own copy it would have to be purchased. 

    I do that currently for all the books that I want to include in my permanent collection.

    The costs of arc production would decrease.  The publisher would save a bundle in shipping (more than the cost of the ereader) and the likelihood of arc sales would decrease. The midlist authors who don’t have the current print arc distribution could have greater exposure.  Hmm.  Maybe it’s another ebook weekly article.

  17. Marta says:

    Here’s my suggestion, Robin.  When you write a book, why don’t you follow your beliefs and give as many ARCs away as people want to have them to be fair or if they ask for them to sell on EBay?

    I think this has become a personal issue for you; for professional writers it is a business issue.

    And, as a personal issue, you are committed to arguing no matter what. 

    Smart Bitches is supposed to be about the fun, the snark, and the mantitty.  There has been a tragic lack of mantitty in these posts.  There has been no discussion of mullets, or heaving bosoms, or bulging bodyparts.  So I’m outa this “discussion,” which is not a discussion, but a nayh-nayh-nayh, and on to the things that make Smart Bitches special and make me want to use a bottle of brain bleach after I read it.

  18. Marta says:

    Oops, that should have read:

    Here’s my suggestion, Robin.  When you write a book, why don’t you follow your beliefs and give away as many ARCs as people want (so you’re being “fair”)if they want to read the book early or just sell multiple copies on EBay for their business.

  19. Robin says:

    Here’s my suggestion, Robin.  When you write a book, why don’t you follow your beliefs and give away as many ARCs as people want (so you’re being “fair”)if they want to read the book early or just sell multiple copies on EBay for their business.

    Aye, aye, aye.

  20. anu439 says:

    I love it when thorough, articulate consideration of people’s opinion is characterized as sticking your tongue out at the grown folk. It just makes me wet, it does.

  21. skyerae says:

    I love that too.

    When I grow up I want to be just like Robin.

    verword – born97 hmmm…

  22. Invisigoth says:

    Marta said “There has been a tragic lack of mantitty in these posts.  There has been no discussion of mullets, or heaving bosoms, or bulging bodyparts….and on to the things that make Smart Bitches special and make me want to use a bottle of brain bleach after I read it.”

    Just for you, Marta 😉
    http://www.roundthestars.net/~eelamwomen/randomfiles/gynecomastia_2_pre_1.jpg
    http://outhouserag.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/mullet.jpg
    http://static.flickr.com/79/240453566_c09cfb5656_m.jpg

  23. TrainerJen says:

    But see, to me this still sounds like it’s on your terms.  I just can’t get behind any insinuation that a reader who buys ARCs isn’t supporting an author or publisher; in fact, in many, many cases, especially where a reader is paying more than sticker price for an ARC, I think it’s exactly the opposite.

    How??? Yeah, people buy the ARCs for the privilage of reading them early. So what? How is THAT supporting the author or publisher, when the person selling them isn’t involved with the author or publisher? I sincerely don’t get it. If they were “supporting” it by giving WOM to an unknown…that’s one thing. But popular authors? I think not. These people selling them know there’s already a fanbase out there, and they WILL get premium price.

    Oh, and BTW…this “guy” on ebay also had several “buy it nows” of the IID ARC. Guess what his asking price was? 86 dollars USD. How is this not taking advantage of the fan base?

    Again. Legalities aside…not saying he’s truely doing anything illegal. But he is a complete and total schmuck making money off from someone else’s work. *shrug*

    I just love lazy bumpkins who work the system to their advantage. Reminds me of my cousin who didn’t pay rent to my mom when he was living in a property she owned. “You’re my aunt. Why should I have to pay rent?” She kicked him out well and quick. Good for the authors for reporting this asshole to the publishers.

    Oh, Thanks for the mantitty. I was thinking this had gotten just a bit too heated.

  24. Robin says:

    How??? Yeah, people buy the ARCs for the privilage of reading them early. So what? How is THAT supporting the author or publisher, when the person selling them isn’t involved with the author or publisher?

    Because IMO the average reader who’s going to pay premium for an ARC isn’t just a reader, she/he’s a *fan*—the fan who stands in line for a signed copy of the final hardcover book; the fan who buys the book in paperback, too, to make sure she has every version of it; the fan who is on messageboards and elsewhere talking up the book and the author and doing a little informal promo that she has actually *paid* to do (rather than the opposite vis a vis a free review copy).  What reader who isn’t a fan of a particualr author’s work would want to pay nearly or more than 100 bucks for an ARC (I’m speaking generally, here—I’m sure there are examples of non-fans buying ARCs, out of curiosity, for example)?

    How is this not taking advantage of the fan base?

    I have a friend who will eagerly pay upwards of a grand each for front section tickets to every Rolling Stones concert tour that comes through her area. She has the money, sellers have the tickets, and she doesn’t feel taken advantage of at all, even though I might personally and privately think she’s nuts for spending that much money, especially more than once.  To her, it’s worth it to pay premium price for a scarce resource.  She doesn’t feel exploited or taken advantage of, because otherwise she would have such a minimal chance of actually getting those seats herself (although she has a couple of times), that she basically sees herself as paying for a premium opportunity.  That *I* might think the market exploits Stones fans doesn’t mean those fans feel that way.  So why must *my* personal opinion be the right one?  Why can’t my friend who pays all that money have the valid POV?

    The more this discussion goes on, the more I have this visceral reaction to the outrage that comes, I think, from my own work as a professional writer (not all of us write fiction, you know).  What I do for a living requires a modicum of literary artistry, and I’m reasonably skilled and successful at it (it’s not like here where I’m often shooting these comments off very rapidly).  Some of my work is copyrighted under my own name, and a lot of it I hand over to the institution for which I work (very non-profit), after which I have literally NO control over how it’s used. Sometimes I personally feel that others are profiting from my work, but mine is not the only perspective on that, and it may not, in the end, be the correct one, especially when the final product serves its intended purpose beyond my little world. 

    Writers aren’t the center of the universe; copyright isn’t our exclusive protection; IMO we sometimes overestimate our importance and confuse the actual creative work we do and the *product* that is created from that, which is often made in collaboration talented others who also have rights to that product.  Then there are SO MANY people who DON’T have even the most basic sense of possession over their creative work but who are no less innovative or talented, that the eBay sale of promotional items that also happen to be books does not push my personal outrage button.  I understand why it pisses authors off, but I just can’t join in on the moral outage.

Comments are closed.

By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.

↑ Back to Top