As to why authors deserve a take of a resold book? Well, I guess the most obvious answer is that someone else is making money off their work. It’s about fair compensation for work done. Sure you’ve paid for the book, and I’m not suggesting that people don’t have the right to make a profit or recoup their investment — I’m saying that the author should also benefit from subsequent sales. In the motion picture industry, they pay residuals to writers, etc for reusing their talent; why shouldn’t this model be applied to other artists? Writers of books get one shot at earning money off their work — that first sale. Writers of songs, at least, get additional royalties through the lifecycle of their work.

The business model has changed dramatically over the past ten years, and price is a driving factor (and, as an aside, I’m not entirely convinced that every book being sold used was purchased initially) in consumer behavior. Retailers like Amazon make the choice between used and new books seem equal — again, I’m not sure that most customers understand the mechanics of compensating authors for their work — and used book sales are rising. This affects a publisher’s ability to buy new artists; it also affects a writer’s ability to pursue their vocation.

Provided publishers and authors (and their associates) can come together on such an idea — and that’s really critical — then the largest realm of resistance I see is the used booksellers, because there will be a small increase in prices, plus additional overhead. This is why I would suggest (using my quarter example) splitting the remaining five cents between the bookseller and an organization charged with administering the collection and distribution of funds. Unless I’m misreading financial reports, just getting Amazon on board with the idea would jumpstart the process, while repairing some of the bad feelings that occurred when it decided to make purchasing used books a prominent feature of its business model.

And, yes, education is a critical component of this. Like I said, most readers don’t understand the financial aspect of writing (most writers don’t understand this, either).

This is no different from other types of ancillary income, except (and I suppose it depends on your agreement) that I’m suggesting the author’s share not be reduced by being subjected to a royalty. This is why I’m suggesting the publisher receive a share off the top — used book sales cut into their revenues as well (and, yeah, I really do love talking about what some people consider hieroglyphics).

On the music side, there are so many things wrong with how musicians are charged for recording, promotion, etc, that it would take many posts to address that issue. However, the same model could be applied to used CDs and it might help.

Too many people are too afraid what could happen if they got vocal about this topic. (i.e. readers getting totally ticked off and not buying books from that author at ALL anymore.)

We kicked around an idea of educating the reading public about the truths of the biz – sort of like how the movie industry is doing those trailers abour how pirating hurts the “common man” of the movie industry, the guy who runs the camera and is trying to feed his family, etc. Thought that maybe SOME of the readers would care that used book sales are hurting the vast majority of authors who don’t make much money anyway.

Here’s what one writer has done in an effort to help educate:

http://sleuths2die4.thewriters.com/AboutTheBiz.htm

Now go forth and agitate. It takes a movement (or a village — should probably study history more).