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.
Just because something is printed on the label doesn’t make it so. It’s not technically illegal (because if it is technically illegal, it’s illegal). It might be a moral or ethical issue but it is not a legal one. There is no implied promise upon the receipt of the books.
In all the conversations I have had with publishers about ARCs not one has said, oh by the way, if we send these to you, you are not to sell them.
Now, am I going to sell them? Nope but neither is it illegal.
The real origin of the “not for sale†tag is most likely to make it crystal clear to readers that this is not the offical book. Why readers would be fooled, I can’t imagine.
Yeah, that “not for sale” tag is classic promomotional language.
I understand how it might chap the hide of any author to see his or her ARC for pre-sale on eBay, but I also agree with you about the motivations of most buyers; I think anyone willing to pay a premium price for an ARC is also going to buy the final book, and probably every other edition, too.
I think one problem is that authors may view copyright as a protection that applies exclusively (or even primarily) to them, when in fact, it’s as much about the market as about individual works. Thus the existence of various limitations on copyright like the First Sale doctrine, for example, which protects those who a) obtain a lawful copy of an ARC, consequently b) extinguishing the copyright holder’s distribution rights on that individual copy as soon as they sell it or otherwise transfer it to another.
It might be a moral or ethical issue but it is not a legal one.
I’m not even sure it’s a moral or ethical issue, frankly. Or I should say rather that I don’t think it’s an *objective* moral or legal issue. I’m more ambivalent about reviewers who sell their ARCs before the final book hits the streets, but in the same way that the law does not see a punishable offense in the sale of an ARC (especially not a punishable offense against the author, since it’s distribution rights at issue), I’m not sure readers should be held morally liable for selling ARCs. I am VERY sympathetic to the “please don’t” language, but not so much to the “it makes you a bad person” implications.
If I had to guess, perhaps it’s because the store sells new books and contracts might have some of that vague legalese that says something about “if you sell our stuff that we don’t want you to sell, we might encourage the distributor of our books to accidentally pass you by”… but that’s just my personal wild assed guess.
Well, I know of one famous bookstore in New York that advertises on its website that it has ARCs available for libraries at reduced cost (post publication, of course). My own experience is that I’ve found ARCs at Indies but not at chains.
Let me go back to the guy on E-bay for a minute—who actually had eight (not seven) copies of Innocent In Death arcs sold or for sale. All claiming to be unread. He didn’t get these for review. He didn’t get an arc from the publisher for promotion or for review, then sell it (either reviewing it or not). Publishers don’t send eight copies of a single title to a single reviewer.
It’s likely he works in publishing, or has a contact who does—and is taking the arcs, then selling them for big bucks. One of my arcs went for $300. And the above example isn’t unusual.
The sale of these eight arcs isn’t going to effect the book—it isn’t going to break the publisher either. But it pisses me off that this guy’s made over a thousand dollars off me—this time—and has two more arcs to go.
Maybe some of you don’t see it as a problem. But it’s not the reviewer or bookseller who piles up some arcs after the books are on sale and makes a few bucks. It’s the ones like this jerk on E-bay who screw it up for everyone else.
Mary-Janice Davison said “I’m not sure the question is right/wrong. Why would the “winner†want an unproofed, boring-looking ARC when they could have the actual edited book, complete with nice shiny cover and copy edits? I think if I was the winner I’d feel a bit cheated.”
(spot the woman who was stumped after ‘
failed to work)
Perhaps you’d just have to describe them a bit more fully than ‘summer beach reading’ so no one felt cheated. Given so many of the cover snarks, a blank cover might be a bonus for a lot of readers 😉
I’m also a bit confused about the editing process. Isn’t an ARC fully edited, but passed out for review before final sales? So it’s not very different from the finished product.
I can certainly see authors being miffed when they’re sold early (I dread to think how much cash you’d get for a Harry Potter ARC from the rabid fanbase). Once the release date’s gone though, I agree with the poster who said they just become another used book.
With, as Mary-Jane said, a boring cover :/
So, I probably wouldn’t even know an ARC from a hole in the wall but I’m okay with that. I don’t think I’m missing out on anything, I’m more for guilt and doubt free books.
Having said that, IMHO since you aren’t stealing anything or profiting personally to any degree or even stepping on too many toes then go for it Sarah. Charity is charity and since I live in Canada the rules might be different but if a not for profit has a not for profit number than thats the end of it. Also, I love the beach, and summer and reading and baskets for that matter so I’m all for it.
At the risk of stirring up a hornets nest, because I have an insatiable curiosity, since we are discussing what’s written inside book covers what are your opinions on books with no covers?
I’m curious. At the grocery store where I used to work I was in charge of books and magazines (we all know where half of my paycheque went) and we had to return the whole book for credit. At the little store in the village where I live not half an hours drive away they still rip the covers off and throw the book in the trash.
So is this a similar issue to the ARC one or is it not.
My understanding is that authors don’t even have the right to control the distribution of arcs. They sell the right to a publisher for the US distribution or the UK distribution or worldwide rights. Ultimately the entity in ownership of the right of resale, if it actually has that right, of an ARC is the publisher.
And I think policing EBay misses the point. The point that needs to be policed is where the 7-8 books are taken by one individual. When Ms. Roberts commented about her example, I immediately thought that it must be an inside job because reviewers and booksellers only get 1 copy. At my friend’s bookstore, the booksellers have to share that copy.
Maybe its at the bookfairs or maybe its at the printing house or whatnot.
If I were in Nora’s shoes, I’d be annoyed too. If some random person is making $$ over my scratch paper, I’d find it irritating. I’d rather donate that potential to the charity of my choice (namely myself, thse days).
However, I’m only a new author with a humble three books on the shelves currently. I’ve handed out ARCs to reviewers who are kind enough to review my books and chat them up for me. (Like you, Candy, but other’s too.) One reviewer carefully told me she NEVER sells ARCS. But she’s done me a big favor by chatting up my stuff without me paying her. I told her to sell the ARC once I was famous, and I was only half kidding.
So Sarah, I would be honored and flattered if you sold my ARC for charity or if you gave it away to a good home. Of course, you may just want to use it as compost in your worm box, and that’s fine too. At least it was recycled!
I don’t know if I’ll change my mind once my ARCs are worth more. I’ll keep you posted.
SWAK,
Lucinda
“It might be a moral or ethical issue but it is not a legal one.”
Actually it is a legal one. There is such a thing as U.S. copyright law. And U.S. copyright law protects the right of distribution, including sale.
This right is protected whether or not the author/publisher includes a notice prohibiting sale in the ARC. When in doubt, ask permission.
Just for fun, I emailed an intellectual property law firm and asked them for their take on this continual discussion. I’ll report on their response.
It seems to me that people who don’t write for a living are the most adamant about how they’re doing a great favor to writers by buying and selling unauthorized copies on the cheap.
I just saw an ARC on EBay of a book that costs $40. It was listed for $3. It’s a beautiful, well-researched history that probably took the author a lifetime of research. (I’d bought a copy at full-price for the husband.) I also saw an ARC by a popular writer that had already gone up to $60 for a $15 book.
ARCs are fine for charity auctions—this form of “disposal” of an unwanted ARC goes on all the time at SF conventions, for instance, and I haven’t met an author yet who objected to their ARCs being used to support a charitable cause (unless it was for a cause they objected to, but that’s a separate issue).
We aren’t saying that there isn’t a copyright law. We are saying that the right to sell a promotional item which was given to the reviewer or whomever is not a copyright violation. The general rule is that the owner of a copy of a copyrighted work may dispose of the work how she or he pleases. Under the “first sale doctrine,†the copyright owner cannot control the future transfer of a particular copy once its material ownership has been transferred.
If the arc is given without any expectation by the publisher, it is more likely a gift and therefore, the property of the recipient to dispose of as he or she wishes.
Further, assuming that it was a copyright violation, you have to show harm and frankly I think a sale of an ARC would fall under the de minimis rule. There is actually a no harm/no foul rule in the law. It’s called causation and if you can’t prove you have been damaged, then you aren’t likely to see relief.
If a store sells stripped books—books stripped of the cover—they’re breaking the law. They strip the cover, send the cover back to the publisher as a return, and are credited for the book. Full credit. THEN, if they sell it rather than disposing of it, they’ve defrauded the publisher who’s credited them for the same book. They’ve cheated the author, too, who is paid no royalties on the book.
Different from selling arcs.
And, to whomever asked, no, arcs are generally not the edited, final copy of the book.
“We are saying that the right to sell a promotional item which was given to the reviewer or whomever is not a copyright violation.”
As much fun as it is to debate the fine points of intellectual copyright law—and I do know about about law because I watched a few episodes of “Night Court” on the Komedy Klassics channel—I’m hoping for an opinion from an intellectual property attorney.
I did an event last week with one of the world’s experts on intellectual property, Stanford Law Professor Paul Goldstein. He’s the author of Errors and Omissions, a crime thriller about IP. I’ll ask him if I don’t hear back from the IP law firm.
Yes, no selling of stipped books. Makes perfect sense to me. What about other usage?
No selling stripped books either 🙂
As much fun as it is to debate the fine points of intellectual copyright law—and I do know about about law because I watched a few episodes of “Night Court†on the Komedy Klassics channel—I’m hoping for an opinion from an intellectual property attorney.
Well, I got an opinion from an IP attorney at another big name law school (he teaches and is a practicing atty—very prominent in the field), and his view was clear: the First Sale doctrine protects the recipient of an ARC, because the ARC is given as a promotional gift with no limited use provisions, and therefore may dispose of it as he/she sees fit. My prof further found it stunning that authors even care about this issue, probably because he’s looking at it *as a copyright issue*, since copyright to distribution is not generally held by the author (at least not in most mainstream circumstances). So it’s not your legal rights that are supposedly being infringed to begin with (although I can understand why authors feel this way).
Copyright law, like all IP law, is a balance between the rights of the creator and the rights of others to use that material or create other material after you create yours. That’s why the duration is limited, and when courts or Congress see fit, that’s why certain further limitations are added on (like the First Sale doctrine). From what I understand, the prevailing opinion in IP law is that we already have TOO MUCH legal limitation through patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret law.
Certainly the logic of copyright law is *in part* to reward the labor and creativity of the copyright holder, but it’s also about creating just enough incentive to keep creativity alive without allowing a monopoly that would, ironically, stifle greater creativity. In other words, it’s largely a market issue, far more than it is a pure integrity of the artist issue. I know most authors don’t see it that way, but perhaps that’s because the copyright creates a perception of “specialness” that isn’t necessarily present in the unique and innovative work people do that isn’t copyright-able or that they don’t hold copyright to, but that we all profit or benefit from in other ways (think about those copywriters, for example, who make a gazillion dollars for some corporate entity and yet don’t own the copyright or trademark to their words).
I’m one who hates ARC sales. I continue to do rewrites on my copy edits, plus the ARCs are almost always unedited so they’re full of places where the computer burped or I got sloppy with a comma. ARCs are not the finished book. Professionals know that, the people who are supposed to get the book in order to gauge how many they’re going to buy or got it because they’re in a position to talk about it to people who will buy it. BUT the people who buy them on eBay think they’re getting a trade paperback. They think they’ve got the real book. And that makes my anal retentive soul INSANE. It’s not a real book until I’m done with the copy edits and the galleys because I rewrite on them, too. That’s not my finished book. And it’s my intellectual property which I have not given permission to be distributed as my work. An ARC is not a t-shirt, it’s my story and it’s not DONE.
So these people are selling a substandard book under my name as the finished novel. I hate them. They’re swindling my readers by selling something they got for free and were expressly told not to sell, but the hell with ethics, they’re gonna make money even though it’s fraud.
So I’m against ARCs being sold.
After that rant, would I stop Sarah from giving away my ARC? Of course not, the bad PR from that is ten times worse than somebody reading an early version of the book that’s going to be. I’m not THAT insane. And it’s for charity. But somebody is going to open that basket and read that ARC and say, “Jenny Crusie isn’t all that good.”
Of course, she might say that even with the finished one. But I’d have a fighting chance with the real book.
Yes, Sarah, go ahead. I’ll live. And it’s for charity. Just put a note on mine that says, “It got really good after she rewrote the galleys.”
Thank you.
The final word…is that there is no final word on ARC sales. Stanford Law Professor Paul Goldstein has been good enough to email back to me on the topic.
He says that the legality of reselling ARCs is “about a century old.” He also says, “In theory, since the recipient did not expressly agree not to resell, she is free to do so. There is, however, a countervailing theory that this restriction imposes a “servitude” on the book that the recipient cannot violate.”
Prof. Goldstein said that litigation would resolve this, but that litigation hasn’t happened because the stakes are “so small, and few publishers would, in any event, want to alienate this important audience.”
So there you have it from the man who wrote the book—or rather, the man who wrote several volumes that are used as casebooks on intellectual property.
I hereby declare this debate done. Let’s go watch “Ugly Betty.”
Oops, that 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence, this should have read:
He says that the debate about the legality of reselling ARCs is “about a century old.â€
I hereby declare this debate done.
So . . . you’re suggesting a change of topic to the first amendment? 😉
(yes I know it’s state actors, but I couldn’t resist, especially since your “final word” was basically the same as my expert witness’s and Jane’s, an expert unto herself—plus it sounds like E might be an atty, too. I’m not sure if Goldstein’s books are bigger than my prof’s, but perhaps we could whip ‘em out and see).
I’m not sure if Goldstein’s books are bigger than my prof’s, but perhaps we could whip ‘em out and see
Wow. That sounds so… male. I think I have law-book envy—well, Freud says so, anyway.
… but the real test is if they can write their names in the snow with them afterward…
From The Dean’s Desk:
But my dear readers (and illustrious writers and personally affected published authors), not one of you has mentioned the utter tackiness of the peddling of ARC’s. MJD did mention their substandard quality but forgot to note the paucity of good adhesive and tactile unpleasantness of the paper. Such unacceptable manners and behavior generally—perhaps ghoulish to profit from the ‘death’ of the ARC.
The Dean
“your ‘final word’ was basically the same as my expert witness’s and Jane’s, an expert unto herself—plus it sounds like E might be an atty, too.”
Actually, there’s a major difference. Prof. Goldstein said that this is undecided and that there are arguments on both sides. Jane said, “We are saying that the right to sell a promotional item which was given to the reviewer or whomever is not a copyright violation.”
“I’m not sure if Goldstein’s books are bigger than my prof’s, but perhaps we could whip ‘em out and see.”
As you wish. Prof. Goldstein’s books include:
-Goldstein On Copyright, Aspen.
-Copyright’s Highway: From Gutenberg to the Celestial Jukebox, Stanford University Press.
-Copyright, Patent, Trademark and Related State Doctrines: Cases and Materials on Intellectual Property Law, Foundation Press.
-International Copyright: Principles, Law and Practice, Oxford University Press.
-International Intellectual Property Law : Cases and Materials,Foundation Press.
-Property Law: Ownership, Use, And Conservation (University Casebook Series)
-Goldstein’s Real Property (University Casebook Series), West Publishing
Also, as was pointed out by others, including Dean, it’s just tacky to sell ARCs. If you must dispose of them, give them away.
Actually, there’s a major difference. Prof. Goldstein said that this is undecided and that there are arguments on both sides. Jane said, “We are saying that the right to sell a promotional item which was given to the reviewer or whomever is not a copyright violation.â€
Actually, the difference, as I understad it, lies in the nature of the ARC itself, which we have all commented on. If it’s a gift, the recipient has no obligations to the giver; if it’s a limited use contract, the recipient *might*—but thus far, publishers have been treating ARCs as gifts, ESPECIALLY in so far as they are routinely given unsolicited, which, again, undermines the limited use contract theory (although the meeting of the minds standard has fallen by the wayside, you still need offer, acceptance, and consideration to create a valid and enforceable contract). Goldstein’s comments refer to and depend on this distinction, as well.
I’m not sure if Goldstein’s books are bigger than my prof’s, but perhaps we could whip ‘em out and see
Wow. That sounds so… male. I think I have law-book envy—well, Freud says so, anyway.
Uh, I hope it was clear I was being facetious. I’m extremely secure in the reputation of my IP professor, as is the legal community (and he, as well, for that matter—WONDERFUL guy).
I’m not an author. But the selling of ARC’s on ebay drives me up a friggin’ WALL. I was DESPERATE to get my hands on the new JD Robb (hey Nora! LOL), literally drooling and foaming at the mouth. Check ebay and what do I see? An ARC going for 356 American Dollars, plus shipping. Are you freaking joking me?
This book will be out at the end of the month (and actually, when I was looking it was late December…I’ve since managed to lay hands on the UK edition. *sigh* I’m so happy
). It runs about 25 bucks. Am I willing to pay fifteen times what the book is worth for an unedited, paperback, poorly bound copy? Especially when I know la Nora will see NO compensation for this? HELL NO! I adore this series, but come on.
It’s not about the author losing sales. I really don’t think that’s the issue here, or why authors get so torqued about it. It’s the fact that these people are passing these books off as the final copy and getting oodles of money for it. THAT is where the moral issue lies.
I saw that guy on ebay with the 8 copies of Innocent in Death…he wasn’t the only one. Do you think it’s right that some random guy with a publishing “connection” is raking in over a thousand dollars, and not one cent is going to the author or publisher? I sure as hell don’t.
These people are no better than drug dealers. It’s like bringing one rock of crack into a roomfull of dealers and selling to the highest bidder. Watch the madness and get LOTS of cash. Super people they are.
Anyways. Just my two cents, FWIW (and it’s not worth much.
)
A roomfull of ADDICTS even. Geesh. I can’t type when I’m on a roll. 😀
Well, slap me and call me blond, but I don’t understand all this hoohah over ARC’s. What makes them so sacrosanct? Please, somebody clue me in!
Shit, used books are bought/sold/traded all over the world all the time, on the Internet and in brick-and-mortar stores. An ARC is nothing more than a book that hasn’t been finessed. So what’s the big freakin’ deal? Honestly, I just don’t get it…especially after reading what Professor Goldstein said. And I don’t think he even knew what he said.
~Shit, used books are bought/sold/traded all over the world all the time, on the Internet and in brick-and-mortar stores.~
And a used book was once a new book, bought and paid for. A used book was the finished, fully edited, published copy. Re-sell them until the pages crumble away—fine with me.
An arc isn’t just not finessed, it’s not FINISHED. It was not bought and paid for.
I imagine I could print out an extra copy of a manuscript, toss it out on ebay well before publication time. Get some nice bucks for it. I can’t see that it wouldn’t be legal—my work, after all. But I bet most people would find it really tacky and exploitive.
I’m clearly asking for a bitch slap, a clue cake, and what not, but what the hell.
To print out a copy and sell it is a violation of the copyright: the publisher bought the right of distribution from you, the author, and thus your “printing and selling” is a violation of that.
The selling of an ARC is not a clear violation. It might be tacky. It might be an ethical issue. I don’t sell my ARCs because I know the generally prevailing authorial feeling on them. I throw them away or, in some instances, I have given them away with Publisher permission. But not everyone may understand that its the generally previailing authorial opinion that the sale of ARCs is considered to be an act only a horrible exploitive person would undertake.
I don’t even know that its exploitative because the violation of a right, if there is one, is the right of the publisher and not the author. In some sense, selling an ARC for $1,000 is no different than the person(s) who sold Suzanne Brockmann’s Ladies Man for $1,000.00. No one paid for that book. It was a giveaway. They were rare and before reprint sold on the secondary market for many many dollar.
And . . . while I’ve not read a ton of arcs and compared them with finished copies, I have read some and I find the differences to be not appreciable. Maybe I am just not comparing books that have been heavily revised.
I think Ms. Crusie’s description of who gets ARCs is a bit of a utopian one.
Professionals know that, the people who are supposed to get the book in order to gauge how many they’re going to buy or got it because they’re in a position to talk about it to people who will buy it.
In talking to my bookseller friend who has been reading ARCs for 17 years now, there is no special ARC reading training school that the booksellers go to before they get an ARC to read so that they know that this isn’t really a book. Maybe I shouldn’t be getting ARCs because while I am happy to ignore strange spellings, grammatical errors and the such, I assume that if the ARC is slow to start or has a deux ax machina ending, it’s going to be there in the final version.
I remember reading an ARC of Narcissus in Chains. All the bad sex that was in the ARC still existed in the final copy. It’s a good thing I didn’t know at the time that the ARC wasn’t a finished copy because I would have had my hopes up that the book was suddenly going to get much better in the next few months.
I’m certainly sorry if I am offending people and I can understand that it is a hot button issue with authors. My hot button issue has always been calling the people who sell arcs thieves and criminals or people engaging in illegal (as opposed to unethical) acts when that isn’t really the case.
No bitch-slapping from me (this time). And you probably know more about copyright law than I do, as I don’t know all that much.
But, I do know that arcs are produced BEFORE the galley stage or final proofing. There was a glitch a few books back with my audio publisher, and the book was recorded from the ms before galley proofing (as in arc). TONS of mistakes—misnamed characters that weren’t caught in line and copy editing, none of the changes I made on the galleys. We got LOTS of complaints from audio readers.
It’s very possible that other authors/editors have cleaner arcs than a lot of mine tend to be. But I’d never proofed a galley and not made corrections or changes for the final version of the book.
As for the ms. I routinely auction off an original ms (of a published book) for charity every year. The publisher’s fine with it—but I can see that it may be a different kettle—legally and ethically—if I’d done that—for my own profit—before publication.
I don’t think the reviewer or bookseller who tosses an arc on ebay or wherever is a thief—but I don’t—obviously—like the practice. I absolutely see the 8 copies of the same arc for sale ebay guy as one.
I think it’s fine to give away for charity purposes.
The person on ebay selling ARC’s is out of line. The people that buy them are nuts too. *A room full of Addicts*-lol!
ARC’s are very cool, imho, just because they are not the final copy. And when it’s from a beloved author it’s special. I still buy the Final polished for sale copy.
I’ve a few ARC’s from various authors for reviewing and I usually donate them or give them to friends to read after they are published. Some of them have the *real* cover some don’t it just depends on the publisher(I think?). As far as throwing the ARC away it’s against my *morals* to throw away a book.
If I were the author and someone was making major bucks off my work I’d be one PO’d redhead. It’s tacky and just plain WRONG.
I guess some people have no morals. We can only hope that the one or two bad eggs get what’s due in the end.
I’m certainly sorry if I am offending people and I can understand that it is a hot button issue with authors. My hot button issue has always been calling the people who sell arcs thieves and criminals or people engaging in illegal (as opposed to unethical) acts when that isn’t really the case
Is it illegal? Probably not. Is it unethical and dishonest? Bet your ass.
I’m not talking about somebody who recieved the book for review purposes (and actually READ THE BOOK), or recieved it as a gift, or whatnot. Completely different kettle. If they want to sell it, then that’s thier own business, and I don’t blame them.
It’s the people like this ebay guy who I will guaran-fricking-TEE has never read a single In Death book (or probably ANY book for that matter). How in the hell is it right that HE should make over a thousand dollars on EIGHT (that’s one more than seven) copies of a single ARC title? He has nothing to do with the publishing, the writing, or anything else when it comes to this book. He’s like a fence. Passing on “stolen” property for profit.
This guy is a toad. A complete and total mantoad. He’s raked in a LOT of money for no work. None (doesn’t that chap your ass?). And he gets to screw the author AND the fans. What a friggin’ prince.
One more thing, the ARCs this guy is selling are copies of an UNPUBLISHED book. The street date isn’t here. These copies started popping up last OCTOBER (which is actually before Born In Death, the last book, hit the selves). He’s not putting ARCs of already published books out there. He’s putting copies of the unpublished book.
You wanna take bets on how much he gets for his ARCs of Innocent in Death once it hits the shelves February 20? I’m taking less than ten bucks.
This guy KNOWS that this is an unpublished book (it’s right there in his ebay selling mantra…“This book isn’t even OUT yet!”). He knows there’s fans out there willing to pay his price. He’s taking advantage, and over and above screwing the author, he’s screwing the fans. That’s reprehensible.
How does it rip off the readers? Is someone holding gun to readers head forcing them to buy the ARC? How is it ripping off the author? That’s money that the author would never see if there was no wrong done. Is this guy taking advantage of the author’s work and reputation? Yes. Is that fair? No. Is it a crime? It depends on how they were obtained. The crime would be at the point of procurement rather than selling.
maybe it sounds like semantics but from a legal standpoint semantics are huge.
maybe it sounds like semantics but from a legal standpoint semantics are huge.
I think it’s more than semantics, in large part because the outrage over any particular sale can be traced directly back to the author in question and her fans who support her outrage. In other words, fans may feel a certain duty of loyalty to the author that isn’t present for those outside that community—for those, in truth, who aren’t fans or who don’t in any way feel obligated to the author. IMO the ethics here are circumstantial and strongly relationship-based. I don’t sell any of my books, so I’m sure as hell not going to start selling ARCs, but I don’t find those who do a scourge to humanity. Opportunits, absolutely, but criminals?—as you said, this has to do with how the ARC was obtained not with the sale itself. Frankly, I’d feel much more loyalty to an author who either asked her fans not to buy or sell ARCs (realizing that her request is not binding in any way) or who at least refrained from certain damning exclamations, in part because I don’t ever want to feel that an author expects certain behaviors of me, in the same way I won’t stop reading her books because of stuff I don’t like in her public persona. I want my relationship to be to the book and not the author, in other words. If I want to pimp an author’s work, I want to do so because the work is great (even though I HAVE picked up books because of a good impression an author left me in an online environment).
As for ARCs themselves, maybe I’m an anomaly, but I don’t find them oh so cool at all. In fact, of the three ARCs I have (not counting Demon Angel, which was sent to me for the purpose of reviewing), they seem perfectly boring to me, NOT because they are so very different from the final book (and IMO would therefore be COLLECTIBLE), but because they are SO MUCH duplicates of the final version. Two of these ARCs are from an author who has been very outspoken here on this issue, and BOTH look like nothing more than xeroxed copies of the mass produced version of the book—down to page numbers, spelling mistakes, paragraphing, chapter headings, etc. Personally, I don’t think readers buy ARCs thinking they’re getting the “real” book; I think they buy them thinking they’re getting something collectible, because it’s different in some way, or because they can’t wait to read a certain book. And as for the alleged differences, they can’t be too large, can they, or reviewing (one of the purposes of the ARC) would be an exercise in futility.
I may think people are crazy to spend more than Costco book price for an ARC on eBay (okay, I might pay for a subscription copy of a Mark Twain novel), but I don’t see the transaction as tantamount to thievery, anymore than I see what I’m paying for cable TV that way (or gas prices).
I’ve been in a deadline cave so I’m posting late on this, but I think it’s an excellent idea, Sarah. Well done you.
I don’t give a rat’s skinny ass, frankly, about the legalities. I’m saying this guy’s selling a book for twenty-five times it’s sale price, BEFORE the book is even released, is a complete and total dickwad.
Because some schmuck in publishing (or wherever) handed him a stack (not one or two…like Nora said, this guy had EIGHT ARCs of the SAME book) of ARCs, he’s making a mint simply because he’s immoral and knows how to use a computer. Did he write the book? N0. Is he the publisher? NO. Has he even READ the book? I sincerely doubt it. I’m sorry, but I find it completely wrong.
It’s ripping off the fans because some of us are EXTREMELY passionate about certain series or authors. I happen to be one of them. I love the In Death series, and there’s a couple of websites devoted to it that prove that I’m not alone. I know of a couple of women who paid that exorbatant amount, because this installment of the series was purported to be a doozy (and yes, it IS). Was that silly of them? Maybe even stupid? Yeah. 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.
Again, I don’t see the problem with selling ARCs AFTER the street date, or even selling them or giving them away BEFORE the street date to charity. Or even selling one that had been passed on and read by the seller.
But this is not the case with this guy. He’s taking advantage of people, and making money off from something that he had NOTHING to do with. It sucks, IMO.
Oh, and BTW, I also have two ARC’s by an author who’s been fairly vocal here…won in contests.
There’s actually quite a few differences in the final copies of them. Not to the story, but spelling, typing, and grammar mistakes. There’s also some duplicate paragraphs or sentences.
They aren’t the finished copy.
However, I don’t think that’s that huge of an issue. It’s the selling of them BEFORE the street date.
Bookstores don’t get to do it, why should some schmuck on ebay?
I know of a couple of women who paid that exorbatant amount, because this installment of the series was purported to be a doozy (and yes, it IS). Was that silly of them? Maybe even stupid? Yeah. 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.
You make it sound like these fans have absolutely no free will or control over themselves—which is not, I’m guessing, the image you want to portray here.
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. The market creates the price on eBay, and in this case the market is driven by readers who otherwise would not have the privilege of reading a book ahead of time they desparately want. It’s unfair that those readers have to pay that much, but IMO that’s not the fault of the sellers. I wonder if the vast increase of author websites, reader blogs, and message boards hasn’t actually amped up the value of ARCs. Wouldn’t that be interesting.