International ISBN Agency’s eBook Study – What Does it Mean?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Larkin Flora on January 11, 2011 at 4:29pm

Like everyone else, it seems that the International ISBN Agency is trying to figure out what to do, which could appear as if they are grasping to keep their relevancy in regards to ebooks. The cynic might look at their guidelines as an attempt to stay in the game.

 

Since, based on my reading, we are still lacking any clearindustry standards from the Agency, I evaluated their study and guidelines by what I think would benefit the publisher, and second, by what is best for the consumer.

 

In their Guidelines and FAQ (you can download it below), they recommend that each different format have a separate ISBN and this makes some logical sense. It is a way for publishers to track their different products; it will help consumers identify which product they are buying, or which “content experience” they will get. So far, so good.

 

However, it really doesn’t make sense to have each separate DRM type in each format have a separate ISBN. What makes each ebook a unique product? Content and file type, yes. DRM, I’m not so sure. It is often the distribution channel that requires DRM files, or attaches DRM to the file, which means that each store that requires DRM would want a separate ISBN.

 

All of the main ebookstores have different DRM rules for use on their specific device. As publishers, we can hope that the consumer has done her research when deciding about what device to use and what bookstore to buy from. Ebooks sold in the nook store will have a different DRM than those sold on the Kobo or Googleebookstores (the nook is noted for its lending program). Does the nook formatted ebook need a separate ISBN from the other epub file? Again, it’s unclear.

 

At this time, you do not need to provide ISBNS for ebooks in the Apple i-bookstore or Amazon’s Kindle store. Until there is an established industry standard telling us otherwise, I would recommend only using different ISBNs for the following:

• different file types (epub, mobi, etc.)

• ebooks of the same file type with different content (videos, images, audio, hyper links, etc.)

Attachments:

• 101118 Guidelines for the assignment of ISBNs to ebooks.pdf, 354 KB

Permalink Reply by J.A. Marlow on January 11, 2011 at 6:09pm

 

On another list I mentioned that "The only thing I'm sure of is that greed will prevail."

 

In a way that was snarky, in a way it wasn't. Not after reading the new 'suggested guidelines'. 

 

I understand this is a new digital world that the status quo are madly scrambling to figure out, organize, and use to benefit both readers and industry. However, I do have a problem with the suggested guidelines. 

 

I do agree that each file format needs a different ISBN to help differentiate between them. One for epub, another for mobi and so on. Just like between hardback and paperback. 

However, when I went to the new suggested guidelines, I started laughing. They want every format, every base program, every different DRM format, as well as for files using the same DRM but have different permissions (geez, can DRM go away now?). With the DRM suggestion, that means a publisher would need a different ISBN for each online store the book is sold at, if that store requires the use of their proprietary DRM.

Their guidelines are a bit ridiculous and smack a little too much of the wish to make money on as much as they can.

 

Using Smashwords premium distribution? According to the way the service works, you are doing it the wrong way. Why? Because Smashwords spits out all kinds of file formats and then sends them out to the online stores where some will slap on DRM and some will respect your wish not to. And, oops, they all have the same ISBN because they are all epub.

 

The suggested guidelines say if you provide a master file to be converted and then distributed, you shouldn't assign it an ISBN. That the ISBN assignments should only happen after the conversions. But, guess what? You can't get into the premium distribution without that ISBN in the first place. Classic chicken/egg problem there. Can't do one without the other.

 

That's a problem that the systems in place at the moment just can't take care of. Maybe they will eventually. Mr. Coker has been very up on the changes occurring. 

The new guidelines suggest one way all the different ISBN's might be connected to show all the sales of an ebook, but it didn't sound like it was completely set up yet. I might be wrong about that. Maybe they do by now.

 

/End snark mode. :)

 

Permalink Reply by Steve Novak on January 12, 2011 at 5:01pm

The study leaves out the very important point that ISBN's cost money.  Since this was not addressed, I feel that the study is flawed.  It appears that much of the other findings were good, that some research was done, but it didn't go far enough. 

 

From an inventory management perspective (where my career started), each and every unique end product (file type, DRM, etc.) must have a unique identifier.  That can be achieved, but the cost issue must be addressed for it to be workable. 

 

It appears that the ISBN agency has not taken the lead and was not able to respond early enough or fast enough at the beginning of the e-book "revolution".  What's going to happen?

Permalink Reply by Ron Lawrence on February 16, 2011 at 8:37am

I agree with Steve. The real issue here is that ISBN's cost money. From an information systems perspective, each format should have a unique identifier. E-books are not inventory items, but they require tracking for sales and accounting purposes nonetheless. It is useful to know how each format is doing.

Perhaps, rather than being a number issued by a private association, that needs to make money, this should become a government function. In the U.S. this seems like the function of the Library of Congress. My understanding is that the equivalent EAN-13 are issued at no cost in Europe. Since this number is truly meant to be international, is there an international agency from which U.S. publishers can request ISBN's?

Permalink Reply by Theresa M. Moore on February 21, 2011 at 8:44pm

Well, seeing as when I click on the link I get a blank page, I can hardly address the document itself. But since the FAQ are accessible, they cling to the concept that every format of a specific title has to have its own number. However, ISBNs are irrelevent because they are not a Legal requirement to publish a book, and I can produce an ebook with its own unique identifier for my catalog without having to pay for it. The Bowker agency has bought into its own propaganda that a number is necessary to sell ebooks at all. But as far as I am concerned, a book should be free of extraneous labeling beyond a catalog number. The title, author, publisher, format and edition number should be sufficient, and as long as the interior file and cover are exactly the same I don't see why I should fork out. There are at least 6 different formats of ebook aside from a printed book. Sorry, but I'm waiting to be impressed.

Permalink Reply by Bradley Flora on February 22, 2011 at 3:29am

Teresa,

 

That's strange that the link didn't work for you. I was just able to redownload their PDF. Here it is attached to this post, please let me know if you have trouble with here, too.

 

Sincerely,

 

bradley flora

SPANnet.org

 

Attachments:

• ISBN e-books study public summary 110105.pdf, 498 KB

Permalink Reply by Ron Lawrence on February 22, 2011 at 6:53am

I'm not crazy about the way a unique identifying number has been implemented and administered in the U.S.  However, it is worth pointing out two things:

 

1. The value that is being added here is insuring an identifier that is unique, world-wide.  That requires an effort that must be paid for somehow.  I think the problem in the U.S. is that Bowker is our sole service provider, with no competition.
2. The ISBN has been an accepted practice of the trade for a long time.  To some extent, if you want to play the game, you have to play by the existing rules.  Not doing so will limit your market.  (That may be perfectly O.K. depending on your particular market.)  Not having this identifier can contribute to the "stigma" for independent publishers that we have discussed in other threads.