Wyden and Eshoo Follow Up with Library Digital Distributers

As reported by Andrew Albanese in Publishers Weekly and Makena Kelly in The Verge, Senator Wyden and Representative Eshoo have followed their earlier inquiry to the Big 5 Publishers with letters to nine digital content vendors, representing a large portion of at least the pubic library market: Baker & Taylor (Axis360), Bibliotheca (Cloud Library), EBSCO, Elsevier (RELX), Gale (Cengage), Hoopla (Midwest Tape), Lyrasis/DPLA (Palace Exchange and Marketplace), OverDrive, and ProQuest.

While all of the Big 5 responded to the earlier inquiry—though the Senator and Representative’s offices are not disclosing anything said—this follow-up is predictable. The publishers no doubt (and rightly) said they could not answer some of the questions. The vendors are a better source for many queries: do they get suggested license prices from the publishers (that answer of course is “yes”), do they ever set their own price and how often do they deviate from the suggested price, what are profit margins, do they allow purchase rather than licensing of titles (answer: not without getting clobbered by the publishers), etc.

We know that availability of titles and (more surprisingly) prices and (even more surprisingly) license terms can vary among U.S. and Canadian vendors. We don’t, however, know the scope and frequency of these variations. The market could use much more transparency to determine if it is in fact fair for library readers—and tax payers. It would be very helpful to see the answers to the questions asked both of the publishers and vendors. RF hopes that the questions will be answered and the results made public. If the questions aren’t fully answered, congressional inquiries seem appropriate in light of the growing demand for library digital resources. Indeed, a report annually on these questions would be welcome to monitor the development of the market and test its fairness. Libraries have had no choice but to pay the rates publishers have asked if they wish to meet reader expectations in an increasingly digital reading ecosystem. Publishers and even some vendors have benefitted from costs that likely exceed what libraries get from print circulation. Thank you, Senator Wyden and Representative Eschoo ! This investigation is overdue.

In their words, “It is our understanding that these difficulties arise because e-books are typically offered under more expensive and limited licensing agreements, unlike print books that libraries can typically purchase, own, and lend on their own terms,. These licensing agreements, with terms set by individual publishers and e-book aggregators, often include restrictions on lending, transfer, and reproduction, which may conflict with libraries’ ability to loan books, as well as with copyright exceptions and limitations.”

Indeed!

May Federal legislation follow Maryland and New York’s as necessary.