Seems like there's an opportunity for some kind of middle ground.
Books are emotive. Why not embrace the community's desire to make titles available in different markets, but manage it in such a way that the publisher is involved in the process and has ultimate approval over a digitized version? Active community members get books for free based on the degree of their participation. Everyone else gets to buy designated "community editions" of titles with a proper cut going back to the copyright owner. The community platform takes enough money to keep itself ticking over, including a cut for partner services that make it possible to sell in hard-to-reach global markets.
Sounds crazy, perhaps, but only because publishers still want a one-way relationship. A deep participative relationship with their global community of readers would only be a good thing. And it's less crazy for the publishers / authors than not making any money from these markets at all.
I really think (and hope) open source textbooks are going to solve this. While it might be difficult for OS books to catch on in places where there are market pressures from textbook publishers, in the countries this post mentions where the information just isn't available, there's going to be very little pushback/meddling. I'm really excited to see what this open source initiatives can do outside the US.
You might be right about publishers taking a smaller cut and thinking it's better than nothing- but my guess is that the publishers would rather get no cut (while shutting down anyone who monetizes by pirating their content) than let the information be available in places that can't afford it at their inflated prices (and for other reasons, I'm sure - not trying to oversimplify the complexities of this market). Publishers are already mad enough that they don't get their cut everytime Amazon sells a used version of their textbooks. But this is part of what Apple will solve in their textbook initiatives.
Which is why I really like what Zed Shaw is doing and I hope his series extends to "Learning X The Hard Way", where 'X' can be anything. http://learncodethehardway.org/
manage it in such a way that the publisher is involved in the process and has ultimate approval over a digitized version?
Is that not what we have now? Publishers have final say about whether or not to enter a market? If not, how am I wrong? If I'm right then this system (which is the current one) is broken.
The solution is to not have markets. Have a market. One global market.
Books are emotive. Why not embrace the community's desire to make titles available in different markets, but manage it in such a way that the publisher is involved in the process and has ultimate approval over a digitized version? Active community members get books for free based on the degree of their participation. Everyone else gets to buy designated "community editions" of titles with a proper cut going back to the copyright owner. The community platform takes enough money to keep itself ticking over, including a cut for partner services that make it possible to sell in hard-to-reach global markets.
Sounds crazy, perhaps, but only because publishers still want a one-way relationship. A deep participative relationship with their global community of readers would only be a good thing. And it's less crazy for the publishers / authors than not making any money from these markets at all.