Dead Ink Vinyl

Tim O’Reilly responded to my article on Friday. He confirms that he is the source of the quote and that the quote was used properly. (Thank you for that!) He also had significant feedback about the content of my article. Based on his response, I have added a comment to clarify my intent and position.

[UPDATE 2: Tim O’Reily’s has responded to this article, which prompted me to clarify my intent and position in the comments to this article.]

I really like Seth Godin’s Blog. I’m not in advertising and I’ve never taken a marketing class, so I don’t think like a marketing professional. Seth’s blog helps me see the world from a whole new perspective. It is because I respect Seth Godin so much that I will pick on him a little in this post. (Sorry, Seth.)

Seth quotes Tim O’Reilly as saying “piracy is not the enemy, obscurity is”. The problem is that Seth doesn’t give a source or link for the quote. I like the quote—it’s short, snappy, and dead on—and I wanted to link directly to it, so I punched the quote into Google. What I found was that Tim O’Reilly didn’t make that statement¹. [Update: Seth points out in his comment that Tim O’Reilly is comfortable with the attribution. Thanks for the update! Now I can use the excellent quote with confidence of its authenticity.] More troubling, Seth isn’t the only person to credit Tim O’Reilly with this misquote.

Tim O’Reilly did have some very interesting things to say about obscurity and piracy, but that quote isn’t one of them. The Tim O’Reilly article that contains quotes most closely matching the one above is from openp2p.com in December 2002. The article, entitled Piracy is Progressive Taxation, and Other Thoughts on the Evolution of Online Distribution, contains the following:

• “Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy.”
• “…obscurity is a greater danger than piracy…”

If you haven’t read the original article, you might be tempted to argue that “obscurity is a greater danger that piracy” is close enough to the “piracy is not the enemy, obscurity is” misquote that I’m just splitting hairs. However, the context for Tim’s original quote is a discussion about how the shoplifting of a physical book may have a more detrimental impact on revenue than the pirating of a digital edition of that same book. The full paragraph is:

And overall, as a book publisher who also makes many of our books available in electronic form, we rate the piracy problem as somewhere below shoplifting as a tax on our revenues. Consistent with my observation that obscurity is a greater danger than piracy, shoplifting of a single copy can lead to lost sales of many more. If a bookstore has only one copy of your book, or a music store one copy of your CD, a shoplifted copy essentially makes it disappear from the next potential buyer’s field of possibility. Because the store’s inventory control system says the product hasn’t been sold, it may not be reordered for weeks or months, perhaps not at all.

This is clearly miles away from the point that Seth Godin was making about the economies of free products and services² when he included the Tim O’Reilly misquote as an argumentum ad verecundiam.

So, when quoting someone as part of an argument from authority, more effort should be made to ensure that quote is accurate and stop crediting Tim O’Reilly with the insight that that obscurity is the enemy.

¹ At least, Tim O’Reilly didn’t make the statement in an online resource that I can find through search engines. If he made it during a speech, such as at a conference, it would be even more important to note its origins; e.g., “At the TOC Conference, Tim O’Reilly said…”.

² Specifically, that “buying attention is a marketing expense, and one way to budget for that is to deduct it from the cost of your product”.

Amazon.com is rumored to be entering the ebook market with it’s own ebook reader, called “Kindle”. Kindle can be seen here in all of it’s glory. Amazon believes that Kindle will have competitive advantages, such as 3G wireless data service and access to Amazon’s vast ebook library, that will make it compelling to consumers.

To which I say: yawn!

First, the device is just plain ugly. Who wants to be seen pulling that out of their bag on the train ride to work? Anyone who is willing to drop $500 on a consumer electronics item expects it to be stylish. Even if “stylish” is asking too much, the device should at least not look like something dreamed up during the early 1980s. I know that the ’80s big glasses are back and the ’80s fashions are influencing today’s leading designers, but the ’80s look for electronics was dorky — even in the ’80s.

Speaking of people willing to spend $500 on consumer electronics, who is the target audience for this device? What is the value proposition of this device — or any ebook reader? Are ebooks going to be cheaper than printed books? Maybe a little, but so far ebook prices aren’t compellingly lower than traditional books. Certainly they are not low enough to overcome the risks associated with DRM content.

Convenience? I don’t see it. Most people read one book at a time, so the ability to carry dozens of books with you isn’t compelling. Also, for readers who consume one book at a time, trading the print edition for the ebook reader isn’t a big savings in space or weight. Finally, if I’m on the train, sitting in a Starbucks, or in the park reading the Biography of FDR, I want everyone to know that I’m reading the Biography of FDR. Yes, it’s snobbish, but so the are people who read biographies of presidents.

Some commentators are speculating that the Amazon Kindle could do to books what the iPod did to music. Not going to happen. The consumer’s relationship to books is very different than the consumer’s relationship to music. A CD holds an hour’s worth of entertainment. A book holds a day’s worth of entertainment. Musical selection is subject to mood, so the availability of a wide variety of albums or songs is great. Books are less subject to those pressures. What’s more, I don’t see digital books as having anything to offer above print books. Consequently, the ebook reader is not a compelling replacement for print books.

In fact, I assert that the whole term “ebook” is leading everyone on the wrong direction. Replacing books is not the ebook reader’s killer app. Where I do see very intriguing possibilities for ebook readers are in books for boomers, reviving periodical old media, and — most importantly — in new media.

Books for boomers. An advantage that ebook readers have over print is that ebook readers can change the size of the book’s typography. This is a huge benefit for people like my parents who love to read, but whose eyesight isn’t as sharp as their 20-something and 30-something children. Unfortunately, increasing the size of an ebook’s type makes the ebook content harder to read for long stretches by increasing the number of line breaks that the reader has to consumer per unit of content (e.g., 100 words). An obvious solution to this would be to have the ebook reader behave like MobileSafari and enlarge content without reflowing it when the screen is rotated into landscape.

As I mentioned earlier, most people aren’t interested in carrying more than one or two books at a time and books aren’t particularly heavy or bothersome. Additionally, books tend to be read start to finish, so ebook readers don’t offer a lot of advantages. Finally, most ebook content will be encumbered by DRM, which means that consumers will need to worry about whether their ebook purchases will be readable in 3, 5, or 20 years. (Yes, 20! If you spend $150-$200 on the Harry Potter series or Lord of the Rings as ebook content while in your 20s, you want to know if you’ll be able to reread them or read them to your children one day.) However, newspapers are the exact opposite of books in all of these areas. They are somewhat cumbersome (though not bad) and they are a bother to read. They are big, they get ink on your hands, and most people read newspapers by jumping around to the content that interests them. Finally, almost nobody has the strong expectation that they should be able to read today’s newspaper article in ten years. Most people have a “read and discard” relationship with newspapers and magazines. Thus, an ebook reader is nearly a perfect match for periodical traditional media. The content could be searched, cross-linked, and have “Related Articles” to facilitate scanning for the bits of interest.

I would be willing to pay the WSJ, NYTimes, Chicago Tribune, Oak Park Leaves, and Crain’s Chicago Business each small monthly fees to have subscriptions to their latest content ready to be sync’d to my ebook reader every morning in an appealing format that takes advantage of the device. I say “sync’d” because I don’t want to be tethered to the Internet to enjoy my content throughout the day. Just like I listen to podcasts while offline, I want to read content offline.

There. I just saved the newspaper industry. But they shouldn’t be too happy: the same things that make an ebook reader great for periodical traditional media make them great for blogs. Sync everything in the morning, read it on the way into work and home again. Searchable, cross-referenced, and waiting to be consumed at my leisure. No Internet connection required after synching.

While I’m talking about myself, I should note that all of the stuff I said before about why ebooks aren’t a good replacement for books don’t apply to me. In my backpack I currently have six (6!) books.

1. Essential SNMP
2. Pro Nagios 2.0
3. Java Management Extensions
4. CSS: The Missing Manual
5. GUI Bloopers 2.0
6. Agile Web Development with Rails

Notice a trend? Yes, they are all technology books. Sure, six is a bit excessive, but I haven’t unpacked from my day trip to Bloomington yet. Anyway, I commonly find myself carrying two or three computer books in my computer bag. Having all of these books available in an ebook reader would be more convenient to carry around. Many computer books — particularly those that follow the “cookbook” or “recipes” format — are specifically intended to be consumed by jumping around to the sections of interest. Computer books are often referenced later, so an ebook reader’s ability to search the books would be invaluable. Finally, I rarely care if a computer book will be readable in 5+ years. The information in it will probably be obsolete. Not all technology books are like that, of course, but many of them — I would venture to say most of them — are like that. So the DRM on ebooks wouldn’t be terribly concerning. Unfortunately, full-length technology books are almost never available in ebook format. (Although more are available as PDFs, which is encouraging.)

Running with this idea of technology books in ebook format, the finish line would seem to be plugging into the O’Reilly Safari service or similar online book lenders. I don’t currently use the Safari service because it’s restrictions are incompatible with my book usage. I don’t read books online. Articles are a comfortable length to be read online. Books — even chapters in books — are not. I want PDFs that I can print. Not just HTML pages — real PDFs that have had the tender ministrations of a print designer, including good typography. Just give me the pages directly from the book. I’m getting off topic. My point is that the Safari service would be compelling if I could dump the books on my bookshelf to an ebook reader. Slap on whatever DRM makes the publishers feel comfortable as long as I can comfortably read several chapters in one sitting and view the diagrams.

One more thought of how an ebook reader could be useful is during research. Academic journal articles, books, and so on. The ebook reader could help researchers by allowing them to “highlight” (or underline, if you’re like my wife) relevant material and provide a mechanism to copy those quotes into another application and provide full APA, MLA, Turabian, and Chicago citation styles. That would be very, very convenient.

All of this is to say that I am the target demographic for ebooks and the ebook providers are still completely failing to convince me. Until the ebook providers seriously think about ebook readers as devices unto themselves instead of as simply a mechanism to display existing books they will miss out on opportunities to make really amazing solutions.