« | Home | »

Virtual Bookshelves

Tags: | |

Google announced that they were going into the digital bookselling business at last year’s Frankfurt Book Fair. The first e-books for sale from Google Editions, they said, were going to be available in the first half of 2010. As yet, there’s still no sign of them although Google remains adamant that the project is on its way. It’s already clear that there are some key differences between what Google Editions will offer and what’s already on the market.

At the moment, e-book sales are tied to a particular device: Amazon’s Kindle, Apple’s iPad, Sony’s Reader. This (in theory) makes it easier for publishers to control a book’s digital rights management, but it has obvious disadvantages for readers: books may not be available in the format you want; you can’t trade in your Kindle for an iPad without losing all the books you’ve bought; you can’t lend them to anyone else (though Amazon this week announced that it is keen to allow lending of its Kindle books, publishers permitting – still, not to more than one person and not for more than two weeks).

Google Editions, by contrast, will allow you to set up a ‘virtual bookshelf’ online and access it from any device: PC, laptop, iPad or mobile phone. It seems it will be possible to share your books with friends simply by giving them your password.

Google Books, the internet giant’s online library, has already scanned and made available online (subject to copyright restrictions) more than 12 million books including out-of-print titles. By contrast, when Google Editions finally launches there could be as many as half a million books available (all in print) compared to Amazon’s constantly growing Kindle stocklist of slightly under the half million mark. Google already has agreements with many writers and publishers that small portions of their work will be made available through Google Books (much like Amazon’s ‘look inside’ feature). Subject to further agreement, Google Editions will allow the sale of these books (with the ensuing royalty payments, though the level of reimbursement would need to be negotiated on a title by title basis with each author or the publisher who holds individual rights).

Potential profits are high, however. Google Editions is likely to make a serious dent in Amazon’s share of the e-book market (the Society of Authors has suggested the competition will be a good thing): up to 60 per cent, according to Credit Suisse. Still, the market is growing so quickly that Amazon’s revenue from e-book sales may anyway rise by as much as £450 million a year over the next five to six years. The market for reading devices is expanding rapidly too. Analysts at the Yankee Group recently predicted that the American e-book reader market is ‘about to catch fire sparking from $1.3bn revenue in 2010 to $2.5bn by 2013’. It has been suggested that the delay in launching Google Editions may be deliberate, so that it can tie in with the company’s answer to the iPad – the Google Tablet. Currently, however, there is no launch date for either.

Comments on “Virtual Bookshelves”

  1. Geoff Roberts says:

    I don’t really care when Google launches – the only question I have is, how do the authors benefit from this electronic marketing device? There will be some people who start reading, say Kirkegaard on their Kimble (or whatever the pesky things are called) but I refuse to have my books chosen for me by Amazon, Google, Bill Gates or any of his satraps.

  2. gr_cl says:

    Actually you _can_ read Kindle books on an iPad or an iPhone: there are Kindle apps for both devices.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • UncleShoutingSmut on Goodbye, Circumflex: Unfortunately this post is likely to leave readers with a very partial idea of what is going on. Firstly, there is no "edict": all that has happened i...
    • martyn94 on The Price of Everything: If it's a joke at anyone's expense, it's surely at the expense of any super-rich who take it seriously. I used to skim it occasionally as a diversion ...
    • mideastzebra on Swedish-Israeli Tensions: Avigdor Liberman was not foreign minister November 2015.
    • lars hakanson on Exit Cameron: Europe will for good reason rejoice when the UK elects to leave. The country has over the years provided nothing but obstacles to European integration...
    • Michael Schuller on Immigration Scandals: The Home Office is keen to be seen to be acting tough on immigration, although I'm not sure that the wider project has anything to do with real number...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement