Two Ebook Bill Hearings

RF is pleased that despite lobbying efforts against them, two bills setting out terms for fair library ebook license terms are sailing nicely through state legislatures.

When provided with the facts, legislators understand the lack of fairness.

It is important to note that despite implications to the contrary, these bills are not the same as the Maryland law and not unconstitutional under copyright preemption. We learned from the Maryland hearing. The bills don’t mandate that the publishers set certain prices. They only suggest that publishers must follow state laws if they wish to do library ebook business in these states. The publishers are free not to negotiate and not to do business in the states. States rightfully regulate any number of terms for doing business to protect consumers—and libraries are consumers.

As reported by Ken Dixon, Connecticut lawmakers understand the issue:

Both Republicans and Democrats on the Planning and Development Committee agreed it is time to redraw contract terms.

"This bill is absolutely critical to our towns," said state Rep. Eleni Kavros DeGraw, D-Simsbury, co-chairwoman of the committee. "It is unconscionable to me that I can buy a book, a best-seller for say $10 or $14 when I use a Kindle or an iPad, but libraries that are only get to get two years or 26 uses out of a book that they purchased to make available to patrons online, they're going to pay sometimes five times what that best-seller cost. This is limiting them in the number of books they can purchase. It's limiting them in the expansion of an online library. I think the more that people learn about this situation, the more-outraged they become about just how these publishing companies are really hurting the towns."

"It is about fundamental fairness," said Rep. Joseph Zullo, R-East Haven.

"This legislation wouldn't have been necessary if the publishers weren't charging such ridiculous rates for these books," said Sen. Ryan Fazio of Greenwich, who along with Zullo is a top Republican on the committee. "I didn't go into this bill expecting to support it necessarily, but the prices on the eBooks are so ridiculously high and orders of magnitude higher than the physical books, this legislation wouldn't be advanced if they just were acting in a more reasonable fashion. And I am a major free-market guy."

Listen yourself, if you like, here at the times helpfully set out by the Connecticut Library Association here. Props to Ellen Paul, executive director of the Connecticut Library Consortium, for this explanation: "We're saying if you would like to participate, these are the terms and conditions. It's like the Connecticut DOT paying six times more for asphalt than a general contractor and every two years seeing the road disappear."

Meanwhile in Hawaii, State Librarian Stacey Aldrich reports to RF that HB1412 passed the Senate Education Committee after amendments to remove Academic, Special, and Research libraries (by request) and adding language to say that the law would only apply to future contracts. As previously reported, the bill is carefully constructed to avoid copyright and grounded in state consumer and procurement. See the testimony here. Props to Ms. Aldrich Librarian for the careful explanations (starting at 11:56 of the testimony) of how the bill is not about copyright and for the clear specific examples of how the current licensing practices disadvantage library readers and all taxpayers.

The publishers seem to be doing well enough with the print prices they charge, and libraries buy far more in print than in digital. Print or digital, these are books. All we want are fair and sustainable prices for books. RF is pleased that the legislators in these states understand. We look forward to the bills passing into law. The publishers’ lobbyists may well try to block them in courts, but they’ll have to find something other than copyright to be successful. We wish them the same luck they are having this far in blocking the bills in these two states.