Angry Robot Announces Plan for Book-Sharing Partnership


Logo via Angry Robot

I mentioned last time that this post would cover AR’s Robot Army system, but in true Angry Robot fashion they decided to interrupt my plans with something fresh and exciting.

On Wednesday October 9th, AR announced that they would be partnering with a new social media service called Boosh in order to enable book sharing on mobile phones.

Boosh, which stands for Book Share, is a mobile phone app from developer Evandius that attempts to ease the user’s ability to share e-books with friends and family. Unveiled in March, Boosh “acts as a reader, but then deletes the e-book once it is read, allowing it to be shared amongst that reader’s friends. Once shared, the app also then invites friends of the original reader to buy the e-book.”

E-book sharing has been a contentious issue, particularly because the DRM restrictions on most e-books prevent any sort of sharing. Things have been easing up since the earliest days of the e-book; Amazon currently allows a limited, library-like borrowing system of sharing, while ReDigi has opened up the floodgates for pre-owned digital music sharing (to the dismay of Capitol Records).

In Boosh’s system, the publisher sets the limits on how often a book can be shared for free. Boosh claims that the app will ease the discovery of books and authors on social networks, particularly on the previously-untapped smartphone market.

“Boosh is targeted at mainstream social media users, not just current readers, and allows friends to share their passion in an environment that is immediate and wholly appropriate to them and their lifestyle,” says Steve Kennedy, chief executive of Evanidus. “It’s like letting your friends try your favorite wine rather than just telling them where they can buy it.”

AR’s partnership with Boosh is currently in the pilot stage. AR’s involvement is currently limited to the UK and Ireland, but AR implies that this will most likely change. The Android version of Boosh is currently available to customers in those countries, but the iOS version has been  delayed due to the recent launch of iOS7.

AR is the first genre publisher to participate in Boosh’s program. The first AR novel to be available on the app is Anne Lyle’s 2o12 book The Alchemist of Souls, the first in her Night’s Masque trilogy. AR notes that many more of their authors have signed up to have their AR works available on Boosh.

The most telling aspect of this relationship is that Boosh went to AR in order to seek their partnership in this program.

“Due to our history of innovation we’re often contacted by start-up companies in the publishing realm,” writes Lee Harris, AR’s senior editor. “Sometimes these companies bring us pie-in-the-sky ideas, or rehashes of things that exist elsewhere, but sometimes, just sometimes, we hear from someone with a really interesting idea. Evanidus was one such company.”

While some might claim that statement this is self-aggrandizing of AR, I think that Mr. Harris is perfectly justified. The history does show that AR is repeatedly ahead of the the curve. Their stance on book sharing appears to be another such instance of AR’s shrewdness.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Why Angry Robot Doesn’t Play the DRM Game

It’s no secret that Angry Robot sells their e-books free of DRM. On the store front of The Robot Trading Company (the AR-owned online store that sells e-books from AR, its imprints, and a few companion genre publishers), a bold red banner proudly declares that their e-books are “EPub format” and “DRM-Free” (NOTE: EPUB is a free and open e-book standard that is used by many who wish to forgo DRM). On May 2012, AR celebrated Defective by Design’s Day Against DRM with a 50% off codeword sale on all of the Robot Trading Company’s e-books. As I mentioned in my last post, DRM has become the norm amongst e-book publishers. Why would AR follow a policy that is so deliberately contrarian?

Well, AR made this really easy by answering that question in their own words:

“Here at Angry Robot we’ve never inflicted DRM on our eBooks, preferring to trust our customers and readers instead,” said AR Marketing and Digital Manager Darren Turpin.

Similarly, on their post announcing Clonefiles in 2012, they claim that they “[have] always been champions of DRM-free eBook publishing.” The free, downloadable digital copies that are bundled with Clonefiles-eligible novels are also DRM-free.

I think that their rationale here is quite similar to their reasons for supporting independent bookstores. DRM is an issue that genuinely matters to the people at AR. They have no qualms about using their company to take a public stand, even if it might make business sense to go with the herd.

On the FAQ page at the Robot Trading Company, AR replies to a question about piracy that clarifies their viewpoint.

“Yes, of course we are [concerned about piracy],” reads the FAQ page. “We’d much rather people bought our books so we can continue to pay our authors, and continue to invest in new authors – we just believe that the best way to counter piracy is to offer our e-books in the right format, at the right price, rather than impose restrictions.”

One of AR's most recent DRM-free e-book releases- via the  Robot Trading Company

One of AR’s most recent DRM-free e-book releases- via the Robot Trading Company

Many of AR’s given reasons for going DRM-free directly cite their readers. The idea that DRM ultimately hurts the reader is one that has frequently been cited by opponents of those restrictions.

“…DRM interferes with the user experience,” said publisher Tim O’Reilly, whose publishing house sells DRM-free e-books. “It makes it much harder to have people adopt your product.”

AR explicitly labels themselves as reader-friendly. The phrase “we are fans,” which is used in AR’s mission statement, is unambiguous and closed to interpretation. They place themselves on the same level as their readers, and anything that would hurt their readers would hurt the company. Because they have concluded that DRM is anti-reader, AR will not support DRM lest they betray their mission statement.

AR’s stance is a combination of branding and character. As I discussed in my post on indie bookstores, sincerity sells. Good will and trustworthiness are important in establishing a fanbase for the company as a whole, not simply to that company’s authors. Industry pundits have frequently pointed out that readers typically do not follow publishers as brands and focus entirely on authors and books. However, one only has to look at the results for the #MyFirstAngryRobot tag to see how many readers have genuinely developed an affinity for Angry Robot as a company and a brand.

In terms of character, I honestly believe that AR’s anti-DRM statements are genuine. If their opinions were disingenuous, then AR would not have been the very first genre publisher to forgo DRM, years before the more-publicized publishers followed.

Next time, I will begin my post series on AR’s biggest fan initiative- The Robot Army.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

A Brief History of DRM

Digital Rights Management (called “DRM” by most) is a MASSIVE topic that has been covered extensively by a wealth of qualified journalists and researchers. The DRM Wikipedia page is an exhaustive primer, replete with no less than 169 references. Everyone with a stake in art, from authors to publishers to consumers, is affected by DRM-related policies.

This post is intended to provide a lightning-quick refresher about the relationship between DRM and trade publishers before I discuss Angry Robot’s stance on DRM.

DRM is defined as any technology that is created “with the intent to control the use of digital content and devices after sale” (Wikipedia). Media theorist Steven Berlin Johnson described such technologies as a “glass box” that intentionally limit the interactivity (and, ultimately, the value) of digital media. Most specifically, contemporary DRM measures “seek to control viewing, copying, printing, and altering of works or devices” (Wikipedia). In essence, they determine HOW you can consume a certain piece of work.

Why do content providers gravitate towards such restrictive measures? Most see it as a necessary part of doing digital business. Executives have claimed that these “technologies are important for preventing piracy and illegitimate use of artists’ work.” In an era where the acquisition of pirated content is free, easy, and ubiquitous, locking content might appear to be the only countermeasure.

Opponents argue that the price of the glass box is just too damn high. The anti-DRM website Defective by Design claims that these technologies are “a threat to innovation in media, the privacy of readers, and freedom for computer users.” Similar sentiments have gained a lot of traction in the past decade, with such notable figures as Cory Doctorow, John Walker, and Richard Stallman publicly denouncing the technologies. The most important opponent of DRM, however, has been the consumers themselves.

Despite this fervent outcry, DRM has become the standard for distributed digital content. Almost all of the major e-book providers have some form of encryption on their e-books, technologies used to “limit copying, printing, and sharing of e-books” (Wikipedia). In some cases (most notably with the Amazon Kindle), the DRM is used to limit the number of devices that can access that book (Kindle books can ONLY be read on a Kindle device).

E-book DRM has elicited a strong reaction in particular because many believe that the restrictions go against the very nature of literature. “This malicious device [is] designed to attack the traditional freedoms of readers” claims Richard Stallman, president of the Free Software Foundation. Even publishers aren’t afraid to publicly speak out against these policies and even condone illegal DRM-breaking activities.

Many publishers even express their stance on the issue by offering DRM-free e-books. Defective by Design lists a surprising number of publishers who sell or provide DRM-free digital texts. There are 88 in all, but it’s unsurprising that many of them are either very small presses or work with books in the public domain. However, there are some notable publishers on that list. The ever-growing self-publishing platform Smashwords allows its writers to sell their works DRM-free. The influential STM publisher O’Reilly was an early adopter of the anti-DRM stance, and Image Comics very publicly prides itself on being the only anti-DRM comics publisher.

Some of the largest publishers to go DRM-free have been genre fiction publishers. Two of the largest sellers of science fiction and fantasy novels, Tor and Baen, sell their e-books free of DRM. Tor claims that this move hasn’t impacted their sales at all, and credits the tech-savy nature of genre readers with the popularity of the anti-DRM stance within that community. I personally believe that the proliferation of totalitarian regimes and oppressive dystopias within genre fiction has made those readers particularly inclined to reject DRM.

As previously stated, Angry Robot has firmly aligned itself with the anti-DRM crowd. Why AR chose to follow in the footsteps of its genre peers rather than the money-making titans at Amazon or Apple will be the subject of my next post.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Who Else Bundles, and Why


A typical Blu-Ray/digital combo pack- via Collider

In this final post of my “Clonefiles” series, I will take a brief look at the history of bundling physical and digital products together, concluding where Clonefiles fits into that narrative.

In short, bundling began with the home video industry. In early 2008, Twentieth Century Fox began to include a physical digital copy disk with select high-profile new releases. Prior to this innovation, consumers had to (illegally) rip the films from their physical disks if they desired a separate digital copy without re-purchasing the movie. Since this process tended to be laborious, most resorted to piracy.

By the end of 2008, many of the major studios and home video sellers (including Apple, Disney, Warner Bros., and Lions Gate) all followed suit. Several of the major year-end home video releases, such as The Dark Knight and Mamma Mia!, included a digital copy disk. Ostensibly, the price of the digital copy was rolled into the price of the film as a whole, only increasing the MSRP price by a few dollars (and by the time retailer discounts were factored in, those bundles cost about the same as their non-bundled peers). Essentially, the digital disks were assigned the same value as a bonus feature disk, a product that was already popular with home video buyers.

Five years later, the digital copy is now a fixture of the home video marketplace. Almost all major Blu-Ray or DVD releases include a digital copy of one type or another (for proof, just look at Amazon’s list of Blu-Ray pre-orders). The major new player in the digital video world has been Ultraviolet, a cloud-based licensing system that follows a “buy once, play anywhere” model of cross-device playback. At this moment, UV currently has over 12 million registered accounts and the support of most major studios (Disney and MGM being the exceptions).

In the print world, the first to bundle print and digital books was  O’Reilly. In July 2008 (just as home video bundles were rapidly gaining traction), O’Reilly released 30 DRM-free downloadable bundles that allowed the buyer to purchase the e-book at or below cover price in one of three formats (EPUB, PDF, and Kindle-compatible Mobipocket). While the number of offered formats has changed, O’Reilly’s bundling initiative essentially remains the same in 2013. Despite its similarities to Clonefiles and Matchbook, it is hard to compare O’Reilly’s bundling with those two programs because of O’Reilly’s high prices. O’Reilly publishes high-end STM materials that often exceed $25 (even in e-book format), so a heavily-discounted O’Reilly e-book might still cost the reader $12. This essentially leaves O’Reilly out of the $2.99 debate.

In March 2010, Barnes & Noble publicly flirted with the idea of bundling their print and digital products, going with the discount model of pricing the bundled e-book. However, they never followed up that initial announcement with any actual results and never mentioned that press release again.

A Marvel Comics print/digital bundle- via  Comics Alliance

A Marvel Comics print/digital bundle- via Comics Alliance

The next major print/digital roll-out happened in the world of comics, when DC Comics announced in the summer of 2011 that they would begin to sell print/digital bundles of their high-profile issues. These bundles would be priced a full dollar above their non-bundled counterparts (for a $2.99 regular issue, the $3.99 bundle was a 33% price increase). Customers who bought the bundles could download their digital copy with a code that was located behind a sticker in the print comic (if one were to write down the code in the store without buying, then the comic would be defaced). Marvel Comics followed suit in March 2012, when they included a free digital copy with a purchase of their premium-priced $3.99 issues.

Despite the fact that Marvel and DC continue to publish their print/digital bundles, there has been little growth in bundled comics. Marvel and DC still limit their bundles to the highest-profile titles. No other comics companies offer print/digital bundles on their issues or graphic novels. Marvel began to offer free digital copies with their Season One graphic novels, but no other Marvel graphic novels are bundled with a digital copy.

The next publisher to enter the print/digital race was…you guessed it, Angry Robot with Clonefiles. Just a few days after AR’s initial announcement, the small press Algonquin announced their limited-time program: they offered discounts on their e-book copies if customers purchased the physical book at one of 300 Barnes & Noble locations. This offer was good for the month of July 2012, and unlike Clonefiles Algonquin has not expanded their project since then.

The current chapter of this print/digital saga, of course, is all about Amazon’s MatchBook program.

Looking over this history of bundling, Clonefiles appears to be the closest print equivalent to the movie industry’s digital model. The e-book copy comes at no extra cost or inconvenience to the customer, other than the minimal time it takes to go online and download the copy. Where Clonefiles differs from the home video model is that the digital copy is DRM-free. The digital copy disk and Ultraviolet each evolved with the intention of keeping the digital copy DRM-locked. AR takes a page from O’Reilly and eliminates all DRM-related restrictions.

In essence, AR currently offers the greatest value and the most freedom amongst all other companies (not just publishers) who bundle. This approach appears to be highly profitable for AR, but it would take insider knowledge to know whether or not AR takes a loss with each free e-book they offer.

I will conclude by echoing what I’ve implied earlier: it is too early to tell if Clonefiles can stand up as serious competition to Amazon MatchBook. When MatchBook and Clonefiles occur simultaneously, we will be able to compare how the bundled products rank in their overall book sales. For now, we only have speculation (and lots of books to read).

Next time, I will begin to analyze Angry Robot’s DRM-free stance, starting with a quick history on DRM in the book publishing world.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Why Do the Indies Matter to AR?


The exterior of Mostly Books in South Oxfordshire- via Novelicious

My previous post in the “Clonefiles” series mentioned that Angry Robot titled their post announcing Clonefiles “Supporting Independent Booksellers.” Why did AR decide to include this additional party in their crucial experiment? Is Clonefiles a viable solution for the troubles facing independent bookstores (“indies”) in 2013? My speculation follows.

The indies began to face serious challenges in the early 1990s when the big book chains like Borders and Barnes & Noble entered the arena and began to dominate the bookselling market. Many independent stores closed as a result, and some pundits began to put the very institution of indie booksellers on a deathwatch.

With Borders’ closing in 2011, one might like to say that the tables have turned. However, Borders’ death was a reflection of the declining influence of brick-and-mortar bookstores in general. Even many who claim to love the institution of indie bookstores begrudgingly admit that the fall of independent bookstore might simply be inevitable.

Angry Robot isn’t buying it.

“Indie booksellers are the lifeblood of the community, and as an independent publisher, we’re committed to supporting our friends on the high street,” says AR senior editor Lee Harris in the Clonefiles intropost.

Many who see the indie bookstore as worthy of preservation reflect similar sentiments. IndieBound, a website devoted to connecting readers with their local indies, focuses on the community-wide benefits that stem from indie bookstores. Even President Obama saw fit to comment on the state of the indies, reflecting the truth that small businesses as a whole are suffering. These businesses, claims the President, are “critical to growing our economy.”

AR’s statement makes it clear that they have a personal investment in the health of their “friends on the high street.” While larger corporations tend not to frame company-wide initiatives as personal missions, AR embraces it. Through a lot of their playful language (SF, F, and WTF?!) and very tight publisher-to-fan initiatives (such as The Robot Army, which will be the subject of one or more posts), AR clearly communicates that they are fans on the same level as their buyers.

“We know many readers are madly passionate about their genres,” says AR’s mission statement page. “Angry Robot is too. If anything, we’re too passionate. We are fans, given at any moment to break into a lengthy harangue about why book X is a lost classic or author Y really should give it up already.”


Dulwich Books in Londion- via Dulwich Books

Such talk is also part of the image they want to create. If they want their readers to know that AR is composed of fans, then they want the indie literature community to know that they are a caring member of that community. In the Clonefiles intropost, they describe themselves as “independent publishers.” While AR could easily focus all of their efforts on safer digital initiatives, they choose to create digital AND print initiatives. They wear their heart on their sleeve, which communicates sincerity to their readers. Such earnestness has the potential to foster goodwill amongst readers, which can create fondness for the company as a whole (I know it worked for me). In publishing, creating loyalty to a publisher is quite rate, but AR seems to have succeeded in developing a fanbase with this approach.

However noble Clonefiles might be, can it actually work as an initiative to save independent bookstores? The 2012 Clonefiles trial proved profitable for Mostly Books, but can other indies look to AR as a guideline for saving their own stores?

Previous attempts to drum up business at indie bookstores using e-books has been mixed at best. Kobo started a project where readers purchase a Kobo at select indie bookstores. In turn, future Kobo e-book purchases benefit the store via sales commissions. This reflects a project that Google attempted two years earlier, which was an outright flop. Kobo’s project was significantly more successful, but the sales margins were still smaller than hoped for. There was far more goodwill towards Kobo’s project than there was towards Waterstones’ selling of Kindles and Kindle e-books in their stores, which was dubbed by the Economist as a “Faustian pact.

Clonefiles has engendered more goodwill than Kobo’s initiative, however, and by innovating with bundling they carved their niche in the indie landscape, which the New York Post claims is the key to keeping an indie bookstore alive. Even in a post-Matchbook world, Clonefiles-carrying stores are still the only providers offering bundled e-books that are both DRM-free and free as in beer.

If these stores maintain that niche factor, however, it will prevent a Clonefiles model from becoming the messiah for the indie bookseller world. Since Matchbook has not fully rolled out yet, we have yet to see whether or not Clonefiles can seriously compete with Amazon’s program. For now, holding onto a niche might be a small victory worth savoring. Only time (and sales figures) can tell.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The 2012 Clonefiles Experiment


If any blog post ever had a title that sounded like a 50’s pulp SF novel, it was this one- via The Cardboard Republic

Before I begin, a couple of quick announcements:

1). This Tuesday (September 24th) sees the release of four new Angry Robot paperbacks: Seven Forges by James A. Moore, All is Fair by Emma Newman, The Prince Thief by David Tallerman, and the Empire of Blood Omnibus by Gav Thorpe.

2). I just launched a brand-new WordPress book review blog at Please check it out!

I will now take you from the present to July 2012. Angry Robot, a publisher known by few outside of its niche, piqued the interest of the mainstream industry when they announced their intentions to conduct a trial run of their Clonefiles initiative (I detail the elements of the program in this post). Angry Robot was not the very first company to experiment with print and digital bundling. In 2008, O’Reilly released 30 titles as DRM-free downloadable e-book bundles (where the e-book could be purchased for one dollar). Barnes and Noble flirted with the idea in 2010, and Algonquin Books announced their bundling intentions a few days after Angry Robot’s initial announcement. In another arena of print publishing, both DC Comics and Marvel Comics began to offer print/digital bundles on select titles in 2011.

Angry Robot’s initial announcement was notable for three reasons, the first being the complementary nature of the digital copy.  DC, Marvel, and O’Reilly each charged customers an extra dollar for the bundled edition of that product (NOTE: Marvel technically offered a free digital copy with their $3.99 titles, but the $3.99 price was already inflated from the average price of $2.99). Barnes & Noble and Algonquin offered percentage-based discounts on their select digital titles. In this instance, Angry Robot appeared to be taking a note from the home video industry. Many DVD and Blu-Ray titles are packaged with a separate digital copy disk, and the cost of the digital copy is ostensibly rolled into the cover price of the movie (along with the bonus features disc).

Many on the consumer level applauded this element of Clonefiles: “If you’re anything like me, you’ve probably wondered why the book industry has yet to catch up with the movie industry by including a digital file with each physical purchase…ladies and gents, at long last, that time is here” (via AllwaysUnmended, an author’s blog). Several industry pundits shared the opinion that bundling would ultimately be harmful to the industry. They believed that customers’ “perceived value” of e-books was already too low due to Amazon’s average price of $2.99 for their e-books). If customers began to believe that e-books were worth nothing, then the industry would be in serious financial trouble. Similarly, bundling would muddy up the current system that publishers use for paying authors’ royalties on digital titles.

A DC Comics print/digital bundle- via  Superman Homepage

A DC Comics print/digital bundle- via Superman Homepage

The second important feature of Clonefiles was that each of the digital copies would be DRM-free. By and large, the inclusion of DRM with e-books is a standard practice of the publishing industry. DRM is seen by many publishers as the only way to protect their titles from IP theft and piracy. Others, including Angry Robot, believe that DRM limits creativity and forces consumers to purchase inferior products.

“We’ve always been champions of DRM-free eBook publishing and have always been eager to experiment with new business and distribution models,” writes Lee Harris of Angry Robot.

The most unique element of the 2012 announcement was Angry Robot’s intention to support independent booksellers (“indies”). My next post will analyze this element in greater depth, but I’ll summarize the situation here. Most that have in interest in the publishing industry have one of two opinions regarding the indies. If industry giants (such as Borders) are capable of collapse in this changing landscape, then the indies have no chance and should not receive resources from an already vulnerable industry.  Those with opposing views believe that independent bookstores are truly irreplaceable establishments and, if there is an opportunity to save any of these stores, it should be taken.

Angry Robot falls decidedly into the latter group: “a dual-format offering for Indies seems like a natural extension of our customer-first ethos and a great way for Angry Robot to show our love for the UK’s fantastic Indie bookshop scene” (Angry Robot). They even titled their initial post announcing Clonefiles “Supporting Independent Booksellers,” illustrating the importance that AR puts into that element of the program.

While all of these elements of Clonefiles got pundits to raise their eyebrows, what forced them to really start talking happened three weeks later. In just two weeks of implementing Clonefiles, sales of Angry Robot titles at Mostly Books tripled. The program succeeded way beyond anyone’s expectations. For the first time since the idea of print/digital bundling was thrown around, the industry had quantifiable proof that bundling increased profits.

The publishing blogosphere ran to their computers to offer their commentary, speculating on what this success could mean for the future of the industry. For Angry Robot, it meant the full roll-out of Clonefiles a year later. For the rest of the industry, it might mean a lot more.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

What Is Clonefiles?

Orphan Black’s clone army- via io9

I apologize, readers, for the shortness of this post (1 Job Interview + 1 Assignment + Regular Course Work = 0 Time). I’m going to use this coffee break to quickly summarize Angry Robot’s Clonefiles program, reflect on the reaction (or lack thereof) to their September 3rd announcement, and lay out my plans for my “Clonefiles” series of posts.

Clonefiles is Angry Robot’s initiative to sell print/digital bundles through independent booksellers. When customers purchase an Angry Robot paperback at a participating independent bookstore, they will have the opportunity to download a digital copy of that novel for free. This is an expansion of their 2012 experiment with Clonefiles, which was limited to UK bookstore Mostly Books and proved wildly successful (the 2012 experiment will be the subject of my next post). The 2013 edition of Clonefiles includes seven participating UK bookstores, with four additional establishments expressing interest. Angry Robot plans to announce the participating US bookstores soon.

Angry Robot revealed their plans for expansion at the World Science Fiction Convention (Worldcon), which took place from August 29th through September 2nd. This initial announcement predates their September 3rd press release, which is an important detail because Amazon announced their similar MatchBook program on September 3rd.  While MatchBook took the media by storm, none of this hurried speculation on the effect of print/digital bundles mentioned Clonefiles.

The most logical explanation for this discrepancy might lie in the fact that Amazon is the god emperor of the contemporary book industry. If Amazon tries something new with books, it may set the pace for the future of the industry.  Amazon, love them or hate them, have become important. Angry Robot, while innovative, simply does not have that kind of reach. While MatchBook will be available to millions of customers worldwide upon launch, Clonefiles currently affects only those customers who can get to those seven UK bookstores.

The lack of Clonefiles coverage may come from the fact that the 2012 experiment was heavily publicized.  As I will explain next week, the notion of bundling print and digital books was quite unusual last year, and Angry Robot was one of the very first to play around with that idea. The fact that the full launch of Clonefiles was essentially a…clone…of the 2012 version with added bookstores could explain why the September 3rd announcement didn’t make bigger waves.

There might also be the possibility of snobbery towards genre fiction, which sadly still exists.

A few on the blogosphere did take the time to mention the simultaneous launch of MatchBook and Clonefiles, so it wasn’t entirely ignored. It definitely made a scene during the unveiling at Worldcon, where it was announced in front of fans and authors attending the Hugo Awards. Commenter Steve on the Angry Robot page mentions that spontaneous applause broke out while the announcement was being made. I’m hard-pressed to imagine anyone cheering as they read the press release on Amazon’s homepage.

I’ll continue my coverage of Clonefiles by explaining its history and discussing its importance within the industry. The schedule follows:

1). The 2012 Clonefiles Experiment

2). Why Do the Indies Matter to AR?

3). Who Else Bundles, and Why

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments