Not that that fact is stopping me now... We first suggested that we (Amazon and Hachette) jointly make
author royalties whole during the term of the dispute.
Not exact matches
With news this week that Amazon has added
whole new international markets to its list of places where
authors and publishers can earn a 70 %
royalty on ebooks, the rumors and misinformed half - truths have begun swirling again as
authors set out to decipher the terms.
Here's the kicker, though: they pay the same
royalty to the
author (assuming they report ebook sales honestly, which is a
whole «nother kettle of fish.)
A customer might read 2 paragraphs of a very short story and that
author will earn just as much of a
royalty as if a customer read several chapters of an epic fantasy or perhaps a
whole book of an omnibus.
In an open letter to librarians explaining its switch to limit the number of check - outs a library can offer on an e-book, HarperCollins said that its previous policy of «selling e-books to libraries in perpetuity, if left unchanged, would undermine the emerging e-book eco-system, hurt the growing e-book channel, place additional pressure on physical bookstores, and in the end lead to a decrease in book sales and
royalties paid to
authors.9 Similarly, Simon & Schuster's executive vice president and chief digital officer Elinor Hirschhorn says that the company does not make its e-books available to libraries at all because «[w] e're concerned that
authors and publishers are made
whole by library e-lending and that they aren't losing sales that they might have made in another channel.»
Will they be able to make up lost
royalties per book in volume or will
authors, whose income on the
whole has never been great be beggared so that fat cats like Apple and Amazon can enrich themselves further??