A month back, HarperCollin released this letter.
It basically states that as far as ebooks and libraries go, HarperCollins will only allow 26 loans. They have some absurd idea that physical books only last for 26 loans and after that, they are so damaged the library is forced to buy a new copy. Not true!
Mass market paperback, the cheapest binding possible, do not die at the 27th loan. Hardcovers surely don’t either!
If they did, my childhood mss would have fallen apart a long time ago. The pages are yellowed and there is the odd stain, but the pages have not fallen out. You may be sure I read and reread my favorites far more than 26 times!
Even if physical books were prone to such damage, so what? The near perpetual lifetime of ebooks is one of their attractions.
I could understand their canceling the library’s license to a book after 500 loans (or five years, whichever comes first) but 26? That just makes no sense.
I don’t know. Maybe they are trying to make the library to buy their physical books and avoid their ebooks. But that seems a little out there.
Why are they doing this?
Related articles
- Petition against HarperCollins ebook/library policy garners 53,786 signatures (teleread.com)
- Harper Collins, Lay off! (andrewbwatt.wordpress.com)
- HarperCollins Wants Library EBooks to Self-Destruct After 26 Loans (yro.slashdot.org)
- Librarians giving the lie to HarperCollins (philbradley.typepad.com)
- “HarperCollins Puts 26 Loan Cap on Ebook Circulations” and related posts (cynical-c.com)
- HarperCollins to restrict library e-book loans (i-programmer.info)
- Halifax Library Boycotts HarperCollins eBooks (techdirt.com)
- What Does HarperCollins Really Want? (bcmom.livejournal.com)
- HarperCollins limits downloads on public library eBooks (slashgear.com)
Story Treasury 
all I can think of on this one is that maybe the typical lending time is 2 weeks, so 26 loans, one right after the other, would equal one year. HarperCollins could make a lot of libraries happier if they advertised it as “we won’t make you pay for it again for at least a year!”. either way, the whole thing is completely stupid.
At my library, the lending time for physical books is three books and for ebooks it is two ebooks. So . . . I guess. But it is stupid.
My daughter works in the library and she could not see why I bought a Kindle instead of a Nook. My answer: Why would I want to wait in line for an e-book that they only have X number of copies of anyways. Makes no sense to me.
Jeanie
I have a kindle too! LOL I like their selection better, even though nook accepts epub format, which kindle doesn’t. But Amazon announced that it’s working on a way to allow you to take out library ebooks, so that won’t matter in a few months. Or whenever they actually allow library lending. Sometime this year anyway.