In the book blogosphere, on Book Twitter, and on BookTok, it has become common for people to argue that e-book piracy is not immoral or harmful, and that book lovers should actually support the practice since not everyone can afford books. The argument is often based on the assumptions that e-book piracy does not have an impact in the real world (like stealing a physical item would), that few people do it, and that the people who do engage in piracy are impoverished and incapable of acquiring books legally–either because they do not have access to libraries or because they cannot acquire ARCs. Most of these assumptions are demonstrably false, however, if one engages in a little research.
E-book piracy does have real world consequences that affect both the bottom line of publishers and authors, and their ability to produce more books. E-book piracy is estimated to cost U.S. publishers $300 million dollars each year, a 2019 Forbes article reports, noting that other countries face similar problems. The UK Intellectual Property Office reported in 2017, for instance, that 17% of e-books were consumed illegally. This is not an insignificant amount of stolen property!
And despite the popular take that no book pirates were going to purchase the book anyway, these pirated e-books are often lost sales, as YA fantasy author Maggie Stiefvater demonstrated in 2017 when she shared a personal example of how e-book piracy made her publishers believe her work was no longer popular. The result was a reduced print run for the final book in Stiefavater’s Raven Cycle, and the almost death of what is now the Dreamers Trilogy set in the same world. Stiefvater managed to show, however, that many of those who were unable to pirate copies were able and willing to buy the book. When pirated copies of The Raven King were not immediately available online, her fans complained about having to purchase the book instead, and the print run sold out practically overnight. The sales Stiefvater, suggests, were what convinced her publishers to give the Dreamers Trilogy a chance.
Many in the book blogging community argue that e-book piracy is performed only by teenagers with no spending cash or by the desperately poor, but research indicates otherwise. A Nielsen consumer study conducted in 2017 found that 70% of e-book pirates had a college degree or higher, that they were generally between the ages of 30 and 44, and that their incomes were between $60,000 and $99,000. In other words, the average e-book pirate is a highly educated adult making more than the U.S. average salary. The widespread assumption that e-book piracy is committed primarily by the poor is not only false, but also hurtful–those with less income should not automatically be assumed to be engaging in theft!
In a way, though, in sort of makes sense that people with higher incomes would be the ones engaging in book piracy, because they are the ones more likely to have the means to pirate books in the first place. Downloading e-books requires internet access, a device to read the e-books on, and the free time and stability to read the e-books. The 2021 Pew Research Center “Internet/Broadband Factsheet,” for instance, notes that about 75% of Americans have broadband internet access at home now, but those with less education and less income are less likely to have it. Their stats show that 87% of those making $50,000 to $74,999 have broadband access at home, and 92% of those making $75,000 and up have broadband at home. But only 57% of those making less than $30,000 have broadband access at home. Some people could, of course, be relying solely on their smartphone, but only 27% of those making under $30,000 said they used a smartphone despite not having broadband access at home.
People with lower incomes are not only less likely to have access to broadband access at home, but also less likely to own any sort of device that they could download e-books to. In June 2021, Emily A. Vogels reported on the Pew Research site in an article called “Digital divide persists even as Americans with lower incomes make gains in tech adoption“ that of those making less than $30,000 a year, 24% said they do not own a smartphone, 41% do not own a laptop or desktop computer, and 59% do not own a tablet. In contrast, of those making between $30,000 and $99,000, 87% own a smartphone, 84% own a desktop or laptop, and 53% own a tablet. Those making $100,000 or more nearly all reported owning a digital device of some kind.
Finally, the data from the Pew Research Center on who is less likely/more likely to read also seems to align with the statistics on book piracy. The Pew Research Center’s 2021 article “Who Doesn’t Read Books in America?” shows that people who make under $30,000 a year and who did not earn a college degree are more likely to report not having read a book in the past month. So the research stating that book pirates tend to be highly educated individuals with higher incomes makes sense. These are the people with access to internet and digital devices, and who report that they are reading more often.
The narrative in the bookish community often says that book piracy is a necessity for those who cannot afford books. But the data suggests that the people doing the most book pirating are not the most impoverished and not teens, but rather adults with an annual income between $60,000 and $99,000. And Maggie Stiefvater’s experiment suggests that many book pirates would pay for a book they really wanted to read, if piracy were not so easy. The numbers given above pertain mostly to the U.S., but perhaps similar trends might be found globally, with those with less income finding it more difficult to obtain the internet access and digital devices necessary to download e-books illegally. It’s something to think about as book bloggers and influencers continue to promote book piracy.
Pages Unbound | Book Reviews & Discussions 
The assumption that piracy doesn’t have any impact in the real world is definitely flawed, for the reasons that you’ve laid out. But overall, I think it’s important for authors and publishers to have a good idea about the piracy data for their own books because the experience can really vary. In Stiefvater’s case it was very negative, but I’ve seen reports from other authors that claim that piracy actually led to more sales (weirdly enough).
A big example is Paulo Coehlo, who sometimes pirates his own books – especially for books where it can’t be legitimately purchased. He initially made his publisher VERY angry, but he managed to convince them to make it a marketing strategy. After he pirated his own book, his book sales increased dramatically.
There’s also research that’s more muted on the impact of piracy on sales. The European Commission ordered a study in 2013 on how piracy affects music, book, movie, and game sales in the EU but it wasn’t until a EU parliamentarian got it out through a freedom of information request. The conclusion of the study was that there is no evidence that piracy demonstrably affects copyrighted sales (in the EU) and actually may *help* sales for video games.
Immersive Media & Books did a study of the US in 2020. Interestingly enough, they found that book pirates were actually *more* likely to buy books than their general population counterparts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
* Should say for countries where it can’t legitimately be purchased – ack, typos!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you’ve just pointed out one of the possibly annoying things about publishing (for publishers at least, lol!), which is that the industry is very weird and doesn’t always seem to work in predictable ways!
I think the impact of piracy could very well vary based on the book, author, release date, etc. Stiefvater’s experiment may have worked the way it did because she is a big name author who had a highly anticipated book (part of a series) coming out. The people who couldn’t get it right away were very likely avid fans of the series who had been waiting for the release date and who, when they couldn’t find a copy free right away, were too impatient to wait–and so they bought it. But I imagine that in other circumstances, if one can’t find a free copy of a book online, a person might just go look for something else free and not bother to buy a copy of that particular title.
There are also authors like Brandon Sanderson who have done things like put free copies of their books online, which I’d completely forgotten until you brought up Coehlo. I’d have to look it up. I forget if he did the latest out of generosity or to demonstrate that he could sell books anyway, or both. I think he DID still sell the book. Why? Maybe because he has a devoted fanbase who likes to collect all his works? Would such an experiment work differently for a different author? Maybe?? (I’m sure publishers would love to know and be able to replicate success with every strategy every time!)
And I can see book pirates also buying books, actually…. Anyone dedicated enough to figure out how to pirate books presumably is an avid reader who really likes books. At least some of their money probably goes to buying the ones they’re particularly interested in. That does match up with studies showing that library users, for instance, are also big book buyers. The data seems to be suggesting that people who like to read usually pursue reading through multiple channels, and it’s hard to contain them in one category. One is not usually JUST a library user or JUST a book buyer. Perhaps one is also not ONLY a book pirate.
Very interesting! Thanks for sharing!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s difficult to get reliable data on how piracy affects the publishing industry, because it’s ‘secret.’ I’ve heard cases from many different authors where piracy has negatively AND positively affected their sales. Here in Australia book piracy is not so prevalent – maybe our books aren’t as popular in the world market? Though recognisible names have been affected. While book piracy is a breach of copyright and steals income away from authors and associated professionals; it does help with exposure, name recognition, and accessibility. I don’t think book piracy is going to go away, and methods to police it are difficult to near impossible. It’s going to be up to publishers and self-publishers to come up with strategies and technology to minimize the negative effects as best as possible.
I’ve even read a study that shows people who pirate do so instead of using a digital library – that they would not have bought the book either way. I’ve had publishing houses and authors say that pirated e-books don’t hit their back pocket too much and is a sign that the novel is popular… all the evidence has been anecdotal or based on partial data sets.
It’s one of those issues I shake my head at because it feels too big to actually solve – a case of technology moving faster than laws and policing can keep up with.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, if there is anything that really came out of the Penguin Random House vs. DOJ hearing, it’s definitely that publishers don’t really know what they’re doing and are making half of it up, lol! I can see data on piracy being difficult to acquire; it was difficult for me even to find much data on it aside from reports on the Nielsen study everyone points to.
I could see, too, if the impact of piracy varied based on the book, author, release date, etc. I think Stiefvater’s experiment may have worked the way it did because she is a big name author who had a highly anticipated book (part of a series) coming out. The people who couldn’t get it right away were very likely avid fans of the series who had been waiting for the release date and who, when they couldn’t find a copy free right away, were too impatient to wait–and so they bought it. But I imagine that in other circumstances, if one can’t find a free copy of a book online, a person might just go look for something else free and not bother to buy a copy of that particular title.
I’ve seen the exposure argument for things on YouTube where creators seemingly let copyrighted materials stay up for that reason. In some cases, though, I agree it’s hard to say. Are they doing it on purpose? Do they even know it’s there? Are they trying to get all their stuff taken down, but it’s like playing whack-a-mole and more stuff pops up all the time?
I do think trying to clean the internet of copyrighted works is a losing battle. Authors and publishers just can’t keep up with all the sites that are ready to upload their stuff immediately.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting subject, it’s not something I think about much but I am aware of it.
LikeLike
I wish I could think about it less, but Book Twitter and BookTok seem always to be promoting book piracy for some reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If we could crack down on piracy, then the prices of books would probably go down, which would make them easier to buy. Sadly, as much as we try, we’ll never get a handle on it, so the best we can do is report it when we see it happening (which I’ve done many, many times).
LikeLiked by 1 person
For the “people wouldn’t buy books they pirate anyway” argument, I assume it’s like my library use. I read about 100 books a year, but I probably buy around 10-15 full price (I might get some super cheap somewhere). If I didn’t have a library, I would certainly buy more books I wanted to read. But I wouldn’t buy 100. Maybe I would buy 50. And I would probably take less chance on books I wasn’t sure I would like.
LikeLike
So,all these statistics are US centred?
LikeLike
Yes, the post is about the U.S. as noted above.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think this might have been solved a little if everyone gets library access and all libraries have enough copies to meet the demands. I also believe price affects a lot. Some books I see and really want to read aren’t available in library and in shops or on amazon, it’s really high price. I just have to wait years for price drop. Not everyone will be that patient and going for pirated version is imminent. I would buy books around 350 Rs without hesitation but it’s hard fit 500 and some 1000 Rs per book in budget. I would rather buy 3-5 books in 1000 Rs than just one book for the same price.
LikeLike
I think that would be very interesting to see if it works! I’m sure that international readers in particular are looking for ways to read books online and library access would really help in this regard. In the U.S., though, most people do have library access, even if the e-book is not always as extensive as the physical one (due to those pesky high prices!). Some people I know really just want to own the book, and so library access doesn’t matter to them, unfortunately. Some people just don’t know how lucky they are to have libraries!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting post! I think I only heard of Paul Coehlo’s case (which Mint pointed out) so Maggie’s case as a counter-example is very interesting.
Nowadays, I try to borrow as much as possible from the library and if I buy, I tend to buy from remaindered book stores (I wonder how that affects sales figures, sometimes). I do think some ebook are priced too highly, but honestly, if it’s around $5 I’m okay paying for the ebook. Else I wait for my library to get it.
LikeLike
Thank you, Krysta :). Pieces like this – and all the research you do to support your message – are one of the many reasons I love the writing you and Briana do here. This is such an important conversation to have! And I just wanted to take a moment to thank you and say that I appreciate you for it.
LikeLike
I’m glad you enjoyed it! Sometimes it’s interesting to delve into what people on Twitter are saying and see how much is based on research and how much on….feeling? anecdotal experience?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I saw a campaign commercial last night which was smearing the other candidate. It was a new ad and when I looked at their citations at the bottom of the screen for the “facts” they were including all were from openly biased/unreliable websites. One fact’s citation was just “Twitter”! For real! It didn’t even say who tweeted it! it really drove home, in a new way, how fractured our understanding of research is. Our cultural tendency to universalize our personal and/or anecdotal experience will be something that will captivate future historians, I’m sure. But living in this age can be maddening and exhausting XD.
LikeLike
Aah! I think it physically hurt when you said they cited, “Twitter.” Like all those people who used to cite, “Google!”
I sometimes think back to college when all my friends where sharing posts about a candidate they didn’t like, claiming the candidate was in favor of something really extreme. It seemed unlikely to me that that would be their actual platform (like it was so extreme, it seemed like a parody and not like something they could get votes for endorsing), so I looked into it. The source? The Onion. All these students were in college, quite literally learning how to verify credible sources, and not one of them bothered to check where this info was coming from. I assumed it was because it fit their worldview of why not to vote for the person, but maybe that’s just the nature of the internet–people often don’t have time to go fact checking everything they read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder if it’s both. You know? The barrage of information the internet age gives us certainly makes it harder to fact check everything. But when the information we’re reading fits our worldview – especially for something as heatedly polarizing as our political landscape – I wonder if we’re less inclined to fact check. It clearly doesn’t work the other way. If we read or see something opposed to what we believe, nine times out of ten we refute it out of hand and maybe seek a source that says what we already believe. But if the source supports out worldview, I think we’ve been conditioned to not pick at it. Why verify something if it only challenges us?
I remember reading a study which found students entering college in 2018 and 2019 often had their flight or flight instinct triggered when they encountered an opposing view. Fight or flight! Our polarized landscape, social media echo chambers, and the like are teaching people to respond to a different opinion like they would if a predator jumped out of the woods and attempted to eat them! It was fascinating and helped me understand a lot of what I’ve seen in my classroom over the last five or six years. But it was also deeply disturbing.
I grant I’m in the minority when I saw I like research. It’s often fun for me and I’ve always respected writing which does the same (like I said in my first comment here :D). I get not everyone likes to do it. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t essential and our world only grows scarier and more turbulent when we forget how to do things like verify sources and form informed opinions.
LikeLike
I find the conversation around digital piracy really fascinating, whether it’s about books or video games or tv. People have vastly differing opinions, but it absolutely baffles me that anyone would promote piracy. Even if you’re participating in piracy in private on your own, I don’t understand why you would promote it to other people??
This is such an interesting post and has given me a lot to think about 🙂
LikeLike
I think some people see it as some sort of life hack to save other non-rich people money? Like the same way they share how to save money on groceries or get some bizarre order at Starbucks that is supposed to be cheaper than ordering something normal off the menu. Probably tied in with the misconception that authors are rich, so stealing the book “isn’t hurting them.”
I have a professional musician friend who seriously thought all authors were making tons of money, and I was shocked when he said it so casually. This is a man who spent years busking in the NYC subway to be able to buy food, even though he’s talented and had “real” musician jobs. He should understand the concept that being “good” and “successful” in the arts does not necessarily mean you have money! I was so fast to correct him. Like, no. Some authors are like Taylor Swift and have tons of money. But most of them are actually like . . . you. :p
LikeLike
The story about your friend is really interesting 😂 it seems bizarre to me that he didn’t realise that not all authors are rich, especially given the job and position he is in. I wonder if more people hold the same misconception?
I find it interesting that quite a lot of people are so pro-piracy. You don’t see those same people being pro-theft. If the argument is that authors are rich and I don’t have much money so it’s fine to pirate their book, you could make that argument about Apple or Amazon or Volvo. Yet theft of phones and cars and things isn’t as widespread in the general public as piracy. It makes you think, if it were easier to steal from Amazon and in-person stores, would more people do it and defend it?
LikeLike
I sadly am starting to think that if people thought they could steal physical books and other physical items and get away with it, they would. The attitude seems to be that they deserve the item more than the store and something like a big corporation could take the hit and so they “wouldn’t be harming anyone,” even though that’s not true. I’ve seen news articles about stores that experienced so much theft they shuttered completely and the neighborhood lost their only pharmacy or whatever. But as long as thieves are not getting caught, I guess the idea of getting one over someone else is appealing to a certain segment of people.
LikeLike
I honestly think it’s half “ebooks aren’t ‘real'” and half “no one can stop me from stealing.” If you walked out with an armful of paperbacks from a bookstore without paying, they’d call the police. If you steal ebooks, literally nothing happens to you. There’s basically no risk. It is kind of sad to think maybe more people would just steal anything they felt like if they thought they’d get away with it though.
LikeLike