peter brantley
internet archive
san francisco ca

concept of
an “organizational field”
(defined)
often complex groups or
sets of actors involved.

stable industry indicates
stable network
for both organizations
and people

Disruption in core aspects: production,
means, distribution of goods/services –
creates conflicts

good example:
digital rights for backlist titles
rights to the latent rents
were never arbitrated

confusing enough issue to be a
major component of GBS proposal
(“Author-Publisher Procedures”)

authors X agents X publishers
roles suddenly become vague,
technology makes apparent
buried conflicts in contracts

outcome:
rosetta, wylie v. random house
well what is interesting ... ?
books enter digital market.

the present condition
of the book industry:
a new threshold, for industry-wide
no dominant paradigm for product

the automotive industry:
imagine planes vs. cars
(what if planes offered personal
commuting alternative – wow!)
ebook characterization is happening
in shadow of historical print pattern

the efforts to build
a new market stasis-
determine the primary
“axis of competition”:
product | pricing | services

deep technology shifts
usually remove the ability
to focus on a single axis

digital (creation, distribution)
have {many} {new}
implications for ubiquity and
control of products, services

fields that have become disrupted
are naturally subject to the formation
of new emergent biases in conduct.
(there is no existing practice)

any newly introduced stresses
produce unexpected outcomes
evolving by positive feedbacks,
counters are weak.

such as a tendency for
progressive furthering of
emerging monopolies

international rights will force
new emergent practices
uncertainties are easily introduced
for digital books vs. print products

National historical book price fixing laws
subject to stress from international firms
because digital stresses different vectors

tensions exacerbated by complexities
international vs national legal regime –
changes in law difficult to negotiate
something could emerge in
EU or GATT / WTO context

strikingly uncertain right now in an
international context:
who will sell what to whom for what

this does not even touch on
definition of redistribution or
secondary markets national
or international in context!

e.g. consider digital first sale!
an issue common to software
(shrink wrap licensing) less an
issue for music, movies in the
past (although might change)

or
LENDING ...
not as straightforward as buying a
digital copy and putting it on shelf

digital lending requires a new
coordinated technology infrastructure
with access-based accounting systems
quite different than traditional lending

and ...
publisher recalcitrance to
provide lending inventory to libraries
due to perceived loss of a
new revenue opportunity

might force establishment of new
large library consortia acting as their
own platform services providers –
many outcomes might emerge.

“Hold Hands”, wickenden, Flickr

in organizational fields like publishing
that have had a long period of stability
implicit rules formed to govern action

typically bluffs are not called
and brinksmanship is avoided
(consider wylie v random house–
agent and publisher work it out)

one can see this in technology:
patents are usually cross licensed -
not worth divisive shoot_foot_self

lawsuits typically
signal a breakdown
in normative practices
within an organizational field

the core publishing
industry dependencies
established a rich set
of interactions:
author / agent / publisher / selling-agent

as historical patterns erode
the early stage survivors of
market disruption to rebuild
using existing networks
(e.g., R_Nash’s Cursor Books)

author / agent / publisher / selling-agent
increasingly subject not to redefinition
but re-articulation
Not “what is a publisher”
Now “what is publishing”

as industry, publishing is lucky
it has laid claim to an obvious
higher-goal:
disseminating information

this reference point acts to
reduce friction, mitigating
damage from rent seeking

networks alter dramatically when
powerful new entrants impact a
disrupted organizational field –
1) technologies have changed, and
2) new domains have entered field

that would be
Silicon Valley:
 Apple
 Google
 Amazon

New entrants are not bound
by any extant dependencies.
Network “damage” occurs when
new org field actors first interact.

Odds of engendering wholly unexpected
consequences is dramatically multiplied.
New actors predominately occupy distinct
organizational networks, in different fields

It is this “asteroid from outer space”
characteristic that makes the industry
raw and exposed for the first time in
decades

out of field (technology) disruption
demands engagement with different
industrial sectors, for radical change.

transmedia and web based delivery
are examples where new entrants
better able to produce, distribute

trying to mold oneself
like plastic sheet wrap
around disrupting agents
(Absorb the Mongols!)
is not a strategy for long term survival

Google's entrance into vending books
(as opposed to mining them for data)
is only part of a larger product portfolio
to convenience its existing partners and
to place pressure on valley competitors.

on the bright side ...
we have stunning new range
of opportunities to build new
services

peter brantley
co-founder, open books alliance
director, bookserver project
internet archive
the presidio, san francisco, ca
@naypinya (twitter) peter@archive.org