Free Books!

[tamaranth]

[Poll #1074562]

Comments

[bugshaw.livejournal.com]

I'll read a few pages, get fed up with sitting at the computer, and go buy the book if it grabbed me.

[darth-tigger.livejournal.com]

Exactly what I'd do. I'm sure I'd hate to sit and read an entire book at the computer, and printing out a whole book would probably cost nearly as much as buying a paperback copy (plus be an unmanageable size). I'd read maybe the first chapter, and if I really wanted to read on I'd track down a physical copy one way or another.

If the first chapter didn't seem like my thing I wouldn't feel morally obliged to buy the book because I'd read some, any more than if I'd read a page or two in Waterstones and decided I didn't like it much.

I ticked yes to the second question on the grounds that if the book was so good that I actually did sit and read the whole thing at the computer, I'd really want a copy.

I ticked all the books for your 'interested in reading for free' question, as you didn't have an option for "would quite like to glance at the first page or two but wouldn't carry on if it didn't grab me quickly".

[perlmonger.livejournal.com]

WSS - if it's worth reading, I want to read it on paper; screen is a different medium. That may change when ebook tech really does approach electronic paper, but I'm not convinced that it will for me even then.

[perlmonger.livejournal.com]

Further, the main problem I perceive for authors outside 342 heaps and Booker shortlists is exposure - I'm not going to buy a book I don't encounter. My suspicion is that the viral aspect of putting un-DRMed text online for free will far outweigh however many people don't pay for the thing at all.

Of course, another option is to put a just substantial opening wodge online; get readers hooked, and they'll have to buy the dead tree version. Worked for me with Acts of the Apostles. But, there again, I bought Accelerando (after downloading the whole thing) too.

[zoo-music-girl.livejournal.com]

If I enjoyed it and thought I would re-read it, then I'd buy it, but otherwise no. I do often re-read books I've enjoyed. I've read my very favourite books many times.

[zotz]

Likewise. I have certainly bought books after reading them online at least a couple of times.

[frandowdsofa.livejournal.com]

I'm in this group, I didn't answer the second question because it would depend.

[easterbunny.livejournal.com]

For question 1, I'll remember that I wanted to read it in 3 or 4 years when I spot it on the "Books Featured Because We Can't Justify the Storage Space If They're Never Checked Out" table at the library.

[reddragdiva]

You missed "maybe."

I may drop them a few quid via PayPal if possible.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

There are not words to express how much I dislike this move to put the Booker shortlist on line free. Oh, I see the intentions -- make them more accessible etc -- but the bottom line is that writers make their living by selling books. Yes, even writers who have gained the exposure of being nominated for the Booker. There is a whole industry out therr devoted to trying to persuade people that downloading music for free is an abuse of copyright (and yes, Radiohead put an album up for people to download and pay what they wnted -- but Radiohead are a huge selling band who can afford this). And now here's the Booker people saying 'Okay, let's just spit on people's livelihood so we cvan look populist.' Booker nominated authors are by no means all well known, high-volume-selling names. Some are obscure and near the start of their careers. Some will not have had a huge advance. Maybe this will give one or two a small boost, but for the vast majority this is just lost income. And I hope the person who came up with it has a major infestation of cat fleas (so there, yah boo sucks etc).
One very annoyed Marquise (read low-selling writer)

[reddragdiva]

You are in fact provably wrong on this.

(The second link asks "Let me begin by posing a simple question. Does anyone have any real evidence that having material available for free online-whether legitimately or through piracy-has actually caused any financial harm to any author?" and then goes on to provide actual hard numerical evidence that it is entirely false.)

[msilverstar]

I've read novel-length fanfic on my laptop, so if it's HTML and not PDF, I might well give them a try. If I read the whole thing, I'd definitely feel a moral/ethical responsibility to buy the book.

[goth-twiglet.livejournal.com]

I can't abide digital books. Even after downloading and printing they're generally badly formatted and unattractive: part of the joy of reading is the physical book itself.
I work in a library, I get first dibs on new fiction if I want it and I haven't felt seduced by any of the Booker books. I would only buy a book now if, having read it, I felt I absolutely needed my own copy (which happens suprisingly often).

[marypcb.livejournal.com]

I used ot read a lot of ebooks; now I hardly read any, so I'm answering for now, not then.

I've read the original draft of Bridge of Birds online but usually I'll push each page into OneNote and read on the laptop/tablet later - I'm doing this with the new Liaden book that I've paid the optional money for so I get the trade when it comes out. If I loved the book I would buy it to read later. I wouldn't bother reformating.

I suspect what most people will do is look at the online version and either get bored or like it enough to go pick it up in a bookshop. I like ebooks but there isn't a good enough gadget to make them mass market yet, so free online books compete with other Web pages and YouTube, not with printed books per se.

[ivory-goddess.livejournal.com]

As others have said, I'd read a bit, probably a chapter, then decide if I wanted to continue. If I liked it a lot I'd buy it; if I liked it a bit but was still interested enough to continue I'd borrow it from the library. If it was a very expensive hardback I'd probably library it & wait to buy the paperback, unless the first chapter was stonkingly good.

There's no way I'm reading a whole book on a screen, of any size. Not because paper is sacrosanct or anything, but because reading on a screen for too long makes my eyes hurt. And computers are somewhat unwieldy if you want to read a chapter or 2 in bed before sleep, which I often do.

As for the Booker, I can categorically state that I'm not aware of ever having bought a Booker-nominated novel. I may have read one, possibly, but it would have been borrowed (or, more likely, forcibly lent). In the same way that many book prizes dismiss any and all 'genre' reading (crime, SF, whatever), I tend to dismiss most book prize shortlists as likely full of pretentious wank and entirely not my kind of thing. 'On Chesil Beach', for example - do I really care about 2 sexually-inexperienced losers forever made miserable by a one-off honeymoon incident? My idea of a serious waste of time. I freely admit to being shallow in my choice of reading - thrillers, crime, spooky shit and the like - but that's what I like.

(That said, I did like 'The Life of Pi', which I'm sure was up for one award or another, but I got the copy from you - I didn't buy it!)

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

The Booker shortlist is not actually going to be online for free, the Times screwed up there. I don't have the link to hand, but what is actually happening is that the Booker shortlist is going to be included in some kind of subscription ebook site.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

Beg pardon, not a subscription (http://www.thebookstandard.com/bookstandard/news/author/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003660106). But still for sale.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

And on my answers: whether or not I buy it will depend whether I enjoyed it; and I will be buying Darkmans and probably On Chesil Beach when they appear in paperback.

[elinor.livejournal.com]

I'd get them out of the library next year, if any of them looked interesting enough.