top of page

SPRING 2004 (VOL V, NO. 1)

When any business changes, and the used/rare/antiquarian book market has changed dramatically over the last decade, everybody seems to be pointing fingers at everyone else. The terms “fraud”, “forgery” and “fake” get tossed around in wild abandon. “Playing fields” are described as “tilted”, “honest information” is hidden and “the buying public” routinely cheated. This is, of course, hogwash. There has, in fact, been a revolution in used and rare bookselling, occasioned by the internet, and a lot of the old ways are disappearing. Tuesday was once dedicated to quoting books on postcards, now, we put books into databases to put them into our sites, on a database site or in an auction. Of course, with anything new, there are glitches, and how the internet gets over these will probably determine the future course of the business.


The internet did several things that changed the nature of the book business. First, it opened it up to a new and larger audience, which is vastly different from that of seven or eight years ago. Second, it put information at the tips of their fingers. Third, it opened up trunks in attics, garages and storage sheds, so that rare, isn’t so rare anymore. There are a lot more booksellers in the world now than there were before the internet came along. Some very good ones have grown up on the net, with its wealth of information, and then, of course, there are always the ones who cut corners.


Booksellers did not create the internet. The database and auction sites were created by people with vastly different ideas, goals and expertise than a bookseller. eBay, for example, began life as a sort of internet flea market. It is evolving in two directions at once, as if deciding to be a flea market, or an antique mall, while trying to hold onto both markets. There are inherent differences between the two, thus leading to all manner of problems and becoming a “target of opportunity” for those who want to cut corners a bit.


Not so very long ago, a “flat-signed” book without any verification of the signature, would not have been worth much more than the same book sans signature. In a flea market atmosphere, it is worth more, in an antique mall atmosphere, it is not. eBay’s taxonomy puts all signed books in the “First Edition” category. There is no separate category for verified signatures, or signatures on later printings. Thus, with a signed book, and a light box, one can begin a cottage industry. Hence, the oft-leveled charge of forgery. Not that forgeries don’t sit in catalogues, on database sites, or in brick and mortar stores, they do in gay profusion. eBay, after all, did not invent the light box. It is the seeming aid and comfort eBay is giving to forgers that draws fire. Does this mean that all signatures on eBay are forgeries? Of course not. On the net, I have little doubt that the hidden forgeries on ABE outnumber eBay’s by several times. On eBay, there is often a picture that can belie a forgery, unless it is very good.


And, of course, the “First Edition” category is a big “Welcome” mat for those bent on deception. First Edition is really a pretty meaningless term. And to create a category that is just this catch-all mishmash of a thing creates the confusion that con-men can feed on. If it were put in the Genres, as “Modern First Edition” and defined, it would cut down on a lot of the confusion. Every single book there is had a first edition. “First Editions” are neither especially rare nor particularly valuable. Because eBay is neither designed nor run by booksellers, it is understandable that eBay should fall for this superstition, giving the modern later printing of a best seller this status. So the charge of fraud gets levied. In point of fact, many publishers label later printings “First Edition”, and, indeed, they are; the printing plates are the same. The collector, by and large, is looking for the first appearance of the work and therefore the first print run, and often, if a change was made during that run, the first state. Again, the taxonomy of eBay can be seen to be aiding and abetting the bogus bookseller, and indeed, it does. Once again, the flea market mentality comes into play. The first assumption, and an undoubtedly true one, is that a great many eBay sellers do not know how to distinguish a first edition, first printing, first state. Those who do are, thus, according to some, placed at a disadvantage. In the short run, quite probably this is true. In the long run, however, the honest, knowledgeable and frequent eBay bookseller gains a reputation that not only outweighs the disadvantage, but actually allows for a higher opening bid and final price on better books.


The internet has opened new vistas of information. As a bookseller for more than 30 years, I have a room full of reference books. Yet the internet eclipses my poor little library to the point of making it almost a nonentity. Never, outside of major cities, with large libraries holding extensive collections, has so much information been available to the average collector. Again, eBay doesn’t help, doesn’t recommend sites, or even point out that such references are a google search away. So we get the charge that eBay is hiding information. Indeed, they are. The flea market mentality puts the onus on the buyer, “caveat emptor”. In a brick and mortar store, the onus is likewise, on the buyer, but the atmosphere makes the knowledge available seem greater. While, in many cases this is an illusion, in many cases it is not. Knowledgeable booksellers often take the time to explain, and verify what they have. Many such booksellers have reputations that draw people into their stores, and allow a buyer to trust “First Edition” when they pencil it on the free end paper. This is only beginning to be available on the internet, as some booksellers build an online reputation. Should eBay do more to point out information? Perhaps. Should they do more in the way of providing information, if only links? Probably. However, not being booksellers, not even focusing on bookselling, can they be accused of hiding information? Hardly.


The schizophrenic nature of eBay is open to numerous charges of all types. I don’t think there has been anyone who has been more vocal on the eBay booksellers’ board than I have been about these deficiencies in better books. I am sure that flea marketers, on the other end of things, have their woes as well. Eventually, either eBay or outside entrepreneurs will change this. There will eventually be an auction site and a database site for better books on the internet. That is the future, and we can look forward to it. Time never moves backward, except in Science Fiction novels. Until then, if you are honest and are working on becoming more knowledgeable, you are a part of that future. For now, it doesn’t get better than eBay. But, it will.


Rick Russell, Bookseller Selling as rickrussell on eBay http://sangraal-books.com/

 

Attorney General John Ashcroft is on the campaign trail.


He is not running for office. He is trying to shore up support for the USA Patriot Act. Ashcroft is making speeches to groups all over the country in an effort to head off a growing list of amendments that have been proposed by members of Congress.


It’s a remarkable change in the political fortunes of the Patriot Act, and booksellers can claim a considerable share of the credit for calling attention to its problems.


Certainly, no one could have predicted even eight months ago that opposition to the Patriot Act would grow so quickly. It was approved with astonishing speed-just six weeks after the September 11 attacks. It passed almost unanimously. Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin was the only opponent in the Senate. The vote was 357 to 66 in the House.


The Patriot Act passed so quickly that few members of Congress knew what was in it. One House member observed ruefully that when his copy of the bill reached his desk shortly before the final vote, it was still warm from the copying machine.


The American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE) discovered only in the final days before passage that the Patriot Act contained a provision that gives the FBI the authority to secretly obtain a list of the books purchased by a bookstore customer or borrowed by a library patron. Section 215 gives the FBI the right to search the records of anyone in connection with a foreign intelligence or terrorism investigation, even someone who is not suspected of committing a crime. It also bars booksellers and librarians from reporting the fact that their records have been searched.


We were deeply concerned about the chilling effect of such unprecedented power to inquire into what people were reading. But it was impossible to get much attention for our concerns at a time when anthrax had contaminated the offices of members of Congress and another terrorist attack appeared imminent.


We didn’t have much luck even six months later when ABFFE joined ACLU, the National Coalition Against Censorship and several other free expression groups in holding a press conference in Washington, D.C. Senator Feingold and the late Patsy Mink, a representative from Hawaii, joined us in a hearing room on Capitol Hill. Only one reporter showed up.


That’s pretty much where things stood until March of this year when Congressman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) was persuaded by a group of Vermont booksellers and librarians to introduce the Freedom to Read Protection Act (H.R. 1157). The Sanders bill exempts bookstore and library records from Section 215. The FBI can still obtain the records. However, the requests are subject to the same safeguards that normally apply when the police subpoena bookstore and library records. Even then, we did not expect the support for H.R. 1157 to grow as quickly as it did. It was soon apparent that Section 215 had struck a deep nerve in booksellers and librarians. In May, ABFFE released a statement supporting the Sanders bill that included the names of over 30 book and library groups as well as a number of large companies, including Barnes & Noble, Borders Group, Ingram Book Group and Baker & Taylor.


Soon newspapers were carrying stories about the issue, and public outrage began to grow. Congress is beginning to reflect that concern. The bill currently has 141 co-sponsors, including both Democrats and Republicans.


It wasn’t just Section 215 that was making people nervous. Civil libertarians raised the alarm about Section 213, which authorizes the FBI to conduct secret searches in foreign intelligence investigations. They also criticized the expansion of the FBI’s power to engage in wiretapping. More than 200 communities around the country and several state legislatures have now announced their support for curbing some of the powers granted by the Patriot Act.


In July, pressure to amend the Patriot Act produced a stunning result. By a vote of 309-118, the House voted to bar the Justice Department from executing “sneak and peak” search warrants. This was the first restriction on the Patriot Act to pass the House. The attorney general hit the road very soon after.


Meanwhile, pressure continues to grow to amend Section 215. Several bills have now been introduced in the Senate that have the same purpose as the Freedom to Read Protection Act: Barbara Boxer’s Library and Bookseller Protection Act (S. 1158) and Feingold’s Library, Bookseller and Personal Data Privacy Act (S. 1507). Perhaps the most significant political development recently has been the introduction of corrective legislation by Republicans. Senator Larry Craig of Idaho is the sponsor of the Security and Freedom Ensured Act (S. 1709), which includes the language of the Feingold bill. Representative Otter has introduced a companion bill in the House, H.R. 3352.


The 2003 Congressional session closed without any of this legislation passing. However, we have laid a solid foundation for progress in the 2004 Congressional session.


ABFFE is asking booksellers to help in two ways. First, if you have not done so already, please write or call your members of Congress. If they are already co-sponsors of the Freedom to Read Protection Act or another corrective bill, thank them! It is not easy to support civil liberties at times like this, and your representatives need to know that it is appreciated. If they are not supporting the legislation yet, ask them to become a co-sponsor. To see a list of the co-sponsors of the Freedom to Read Protection Act, use this link,http://news.bookweb.org/freeexpression/1257.html


Co-sponsors of H.R. 3352 and the Senate bills are available through the Library of Congress Web site, THOMAS, To look up contact information about your members of Congress, click here, http://www.house.gov and here http://www.senate.gov


Second, if you’re not already a member of ABFFE, please join today. ABFFE is the bookseller’s voice in the fight against censorship. ABFFE helped pay for the defense of Kramerbooks and the Tattered Cover Book Store when they faced government efforts to obtain their records. A sponsor of Banned Books Week, we are actively involved in a wide range of issues that affect the First Amendment rights of booksellers and their customers.


Dues are $35 for individuals and $100 for bookstores. You can join through our online store, https://www.abffe.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv, by sending a check to ABFFE, 139 Fulton St., Suite 302, New York, NY 10038, or by calling us at (212) 587-4025 with your credit card.


For those of you who have already supported the fight to restore the protections for bookstore privacy, thanks!


 Chris Finan, president American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression chris@abffe.com

 

IOBA Standard readers are getting a good look at what should be the big bookselling story of 2004, with a chance to play an important part in this campaign that will help our businesses, our customers, and America as a whole.


This February, retail and online booksellers, coordinated by the ABA, ALA, and PEN, and other concerned groups and organizations, launched a nationwide and on-line petition, backed by large-scale phone and email campaigns. The goal is to generate 1 millions signatures in support the over 150 US Senators and House Members who sponsor important bi-partisan bills to amend Section 215 of the Patriot Act. This on-line petition, phone and email campaign is being reinforced by a nationwide petition campaign at ABA-member bookstores (open to all stores).


Chronology:


February 17th: ABA, ALA, and PEN jointly announce the “Campaign for Reader Privacy”. (See: http://www.readerprivacy.com/?mod[type]=press and scroll down to Press Release.) READERPRIVACY.COM goes live. This site is a simple one-stop resource supporting this campaign for booksellers, bookstore customers and concerned citizens (no commercial use will be made of information collected). ABFFE.COM also has extensive info.


Emails and calling scripts (see below) go out to booksellers. This is a carefully scripted plan to make sure that Congress hears not just random noise, but that an entire industry is demanding action. This is where you can help, by making sure that Congress hears this is an important business issue. This will take less than 10 minutes of your time.


You will be surprised at how receptive your elected representatives are on this issue when you are calling as a business owner (no matter how small).


Late February: The ABA booksellers and organizations petition campaign rolls out in stores and online. This campaign is open to all and still going on; please participate! You can sign the on-line version at http://www.readerprivacy.com, download a printable version to circulate to your customers and friends, or both! If you would like to add your business name as a supporter of legislation amending Section 215 of the Patriot Act, please go to: http://www.readerprivacy.com/?mod[type]=book_community to sign on.


Late Spring: We will begin to present the petitions to members of Congress this spring during meetings in their home districts and in Washington.


Our goal: To restore the protections for customer privacy-something that will help our country and that we can take pride in for the rest of our lives.


If you don’t make an effort, don’t complain.


What is Section 215?


Section 215 “gives the FBI virtually unlimited access to… bookstore and library records” (please see the ABFFE.com home page for more info and links), and has caused tremendous concern among booksellers and bookstore customers, authors, publishers, distributors, librarians and library patrons, as well as many other groups.


Section 215 of the Patriot Act is an issue that has united American retail and online booksellers, large and small, as never before. It has only been recently that efforts by ABFFE (The American Bookseller’s Foundation for Free Expression) have revealed how united we are as an industry in being concerned about Section 215, and thus it is only now that we can collectively realize how much power we have to drive change.


An Industry United


Most, if not all, American retail and online booksellers are concerned about Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. The firms and associations supporting the two main bi-partisan bills in Congress represent roughly 90% of retail book sales in the US, big market shares of publishers and distributors, as well as the entire library field.


(See:http://www.readerprivacy.com/?mod[type]=learn_more.) Changing this law will repeal the troubling aspects of Section 215 that concern booksellers and our customers.


What does that mean? It means collectively we have the power. It means that if we use this power properly, Congress will hear us. Our customers and staff will no longer be worried by Section 215, and we can get back to serving our customers, growing our businesses, and creating jobs. The uniformity of opinion in our industry regarding Section 215 means that we can address Congress with a clear and simple message: “This law is bad for business and we want it changed now“.


Section 215 – Bipartisan Mistake


The USA Patriot Act was hurriedly crafted and passed after the tragedy of 9/11, a time when Congress clearly felt that the consequences of inaction outweighed the dangers of a bad law. The Patriot Act passed with near-unanimous, bipartisan support, meaning that almost every member of Congress voted in its favor. (Russell Feingold of Wisconsin was the only “no” vote in the Senate. There were 66 opponents in the House.) Most Senators and Representatives will honestly tell you that they did not have a chance to read the bill before voting for it.

In an effort to shore up the increasingly shaky support for the Patriot Act, Attorney General John Ashcroft recently revealed that the Department of Justice has never used Section 215. We should accept him at his word, and conclude that, if Section 215 was not needed in the two years after 9/11, during our Nation’s greatest crisis since Pearl Harbor, then it is clear that the laws that already give the government the power to seek bookstore and library records while protecting against potential abuses of customer privacy are entirely adequate to the task of pursuing terrorists. What this proves is that Section 215 has not made a single American family safer, yet it has upset our customers and cost our industry revenue and our country jobs.


Using Our Muscle


Americans are increasingly concerned about intrusions into their privacy. As a result of this feeling, Congress enacted the “Do Not Call List” which garnered support from over 54 million households in a matter of weeks. As booksellers, we sell a single product category, which means our businesses are extremely vulnerable to changes in consumer behavior. There is evidence that consumers are becoming nervous about making purchases where material is controversial in nature or would be an embarrassment. Any law, such as Section 215, that associates our sole product line with negativity or risk in the mind of the consumer is a threat that must be dealt with.


To my knowledge, there is not a single company in our industry that supports Section 215. A law opposed by our entire industry, which concerns our customers, and has never even been used, is a law without a constituency. A few hundred or thousand phone calls from businesses like ours could make the difference.


Although ABFFE and other Civil Rights and Free Speech groups are currently challenging Section 215 and other aspects of the Patriot Act in court, as businesses we have the ability to get Congress to repeal the part that troubles us, and get results fast.


Get Off the Fence


In my memory of this industry, this sort of unity is rare and unique. I realize that for independent retail and online booksellers continually buffeted by change and brutal competition the very thought that we do in fact have power is an alien concept, but I can assure you that this is in fact the case. So often in our business careers our companies and this nation as a whole are adversely affected by bad laws or circumstances that we feel powerless to change. Section 215 of the Patriot Act is a bad law that we can change.

If you have not considered this issue, or are a fence sitter, I suggest you ask a few random customers the following:


Are you aware that the Federal Government has the right to make us tell them what you read?

If you believed the government would learn what you were buying, are you more likely, less likely or as likely, to buy books in the following subjects:


  • firearms & Second Amendment rights

  • religion (if you want to be specific pick any one you want)

  • depression, anxiety and personal medical issues

  • addiction & recovery

  • abortion, pro-choice & pro-life issues

  • sexuality

And last: As credit card transactions can be traced, ask do you believe your privacy is “better protected” if you pay cash?


The answers will get you off the fence. They will also lead you to understand that there are other, powerful constituencies and special interest groups (all of whom poll extensively), who will shortly realize that Section 215 is impeding their ability to get their message across to future members. And, in the case of the credit card companies, how will they feel about customers shift to cash in bookstore purchases?


Do You Want to Vent – or Win?

For some companies and individuals in our field, opposition to Section 215 is strictly a matter of principle and a patriotic commitment to the freedoms and Constitutional rights bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers, and sustained by the blood and toil of our forefathers. For others, opposition is strictly based upon business principles and their customers’ increasing discomfort. I believe that most of our colleagues oppose Section 215 on both counts.

It is important to remember that the Patriot Act is not a Republican law, it is a bi-partisan law. Just as Democrats were full partners in creating and passing the Patriot Act, Republicans are playing a leading role in changing Section 215 (and Independents as well, Congressman Bernie Sanders, I, VT is author of the leading bill in the House). Just as with Democrats and liberals, Republicans and the Republican Party are not monolithic, and if we approach this as a bad bi-partisan law – not a bad Republican law – Republican Senators and Representatives will in many cases be receptive.


Just prior to 9/11, we at Arundel Books had our own fight over our customer records with Attorney General Ashcroft, the Justice Department, and the FBI. Yes… we won, with help from ABFFE and other groups across the political spectrum. While I realize that Mr. Ashcroft is a divisive and controversial figure, he alone did not pass Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Democratic and Republican Senators and Representatives did. I personally am opposed to Section 215 regardless of which party is in power, no matter who fills the office of Attorney General.


If we individually and collectively confuse Mr. Ashcroft or the Bush Administration with the problem that Section 215 represents, we will make our ultimate victory more difficult.

So, when I tell you that you can vent, or win, what do I mean? Section 215 presents us with a business problem that needs a businesslike solution. Hundreds if not thousands of business owners like you and I need to pick up the phone and spend a few minutes making calls. If we are businesslike, it will be easier to pick up support. If too many of us use this opportunity to attack Mr. Ashcroft, President Bush, or the Republican Party as a whole, there is a good chance that Republican Senators and Representatives whose votes we needwill circle the wagons to defend Section 215 – which is at the end of the day a law that they oppose in principle and would otherwise happily repeal. We would also lose the support and votes of many Democrats (and possibly Independents) who are interested in results and not posturing. The Senate bill, S-1709 (the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act), which we should support, was in fact written and sponsored by a Republican, Senator Larry Craig of Idaho.


If you want to vent, call a talk show, your Mom, or your therapist. If you want to win, take this seriously and treat it like an appointment with your banker. If we take this approach and leave the partisan political rhetoric aside, we will win, our customers will be happy, and America will be better off for our efforts. Our industry is so united that there will be no cost or retaliation and you will feel like you made a difference and achieved something important.


GETTING IT DONE

What to Do?


First of all let me assure you, you are in fact going to enjoy this. It is not like going to the dentist, these people actually want to hear from you and stay in office by being responsive to business owners like us. It is companies like ours that create jobs, pay taxes and make this country work.


If this takes more than 10 minutes, you are a slow dialer.


Get your phone numbers and bill numbers ready, and get your script ready (see below for examples). This will get you to the right person, help you get your point across, respect that person’s time, and leave them time to speak to you. Your ‘script’ should fit on an index card, and you should do one each for the House and the Senate. Feel free to write your own, I have provided a generic model if it helps. Just remember, venting and winning are two different things. Let’s win!


************************

Congress has Two Houses & Two Bills

Just as there are two houses of Congress, there are two somewhat different bills.

The bill in the US Senate is S-1709 (the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act), written and sponsored by a Republican, Senator Larry Craig of Idaho.


Your Senators:

Find your senators’ names and contact info. Go to the following website (you can also check the Government section of your white pages phone book):

http://www.senate.gov Use the pull-down menu to select your state (if you operate or own homes in more than one state, go for broke – call them all).

Write down or print out both of your Senator’s names and phone #’s. Unless you are allergic to long distance, it is best if you call their Washington offices (starts with area code 202).


Have your script ready. Call both of your Senators.

Sample Senate script:


2 Senators, 2 Calls: —————————

How it works:

[ring… Senator Blank’s office]

FIRST – GET THE RIGHT PERSON (hint – it is NOT the Senator but a staff member):

You Ask: Who can I speak with regarding the Senator’s position on S-1709? [If they need more info S-1709 is the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act – bi-partisan, sponsored by Larry Craig and Dick Durbin]

[answer will include name and number – write them down; if the person is unavailable you will get voice mail – in which case you say your name and number, and that you are a business owner and constituent calling for info on the Senator’s position on S-1709]


When you get through, here is a sample script:


Hello [name], thank you for taking my call.

I am calling to inquire about the Senator’s position on S-1709 [If they need more info S-1709 is the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act – bi-partisan, sponsored by Larry Craig and Dick Durbin].


I am a business owner and a constituent (if you share the Senator’s party affiliation say so). Section 215 of the Patriot Act is causing my customers concern and giving me and my business headaches. Mr. Ashcroft himself has plainly said it has not been used, and I would like the Senator to join in support of S-1709 – a bi-partisan bill, sponsored by Larry Craig and Dick Durbin, that will restore the safeguards for customer privacy without undermining the ability of the government to pursue terrorists. Are you aware that virtually every company in our industry opposes Section 215 and supports S-1709 – from the malls to Main Street – amounting to over 90% of gross retail book industry market share?

Where does the Senator stand on this?


If the Senator is supporting the bill – express your thanks and restate the importance of this issue to you.


If the Senator is not yet on board, it helps to leave your name and number and ask for a follow-up call, and ask: How can I help the Senator to understand the importance of this bill to our industry, our customers, and the Senator’s constituents?

Repeat this phone call to your state’s second Senator. Great job!


——

Calls #3 & 4 – Your US Representatives (unless you live in the same zip code as you work – if you own multiple houses of businesses call all Representatives in your areas)

Go to the following website

http://www.house.gov Enter the zip codes that apply for your home and work, and write down names and phone numbers.

———–

[ring… Representative Blank’s office]

FIRST – GET THE RIGHT PERSON (hint – it is NOT the Representative but a staff member):

You Ask: Who can I speak with regarding the Representative’s position on HR-1157? [If they need more info it is Bernie Sanders’ Freedom to Read Protection Act (H.R. 1157) which has over 140 co-sponsors so there is a good chance they are on board]

[Answer will include name and number – write them down; if the person is unavailable you will get voice mail – in which case you say your name and number, and that you are a business owner and constituent calling for info on the Representative’s position on H.R. 1157]

When you get through, here is a sample script:


Hello [name], thank you for taking my call.

I am calling to inquire about the Representative’s position on H.R. 1157 [If they need more info it is Bernie Sanders’ Freedom to Read Protection Act with over 140 co-sponsors].

I am a business owner and a constituent (if you share party affiliation say so). Section 215 of the Patriot Act is causing my customers concern and giving me and my business headaches. Mr. Ashcroft himself has plainly said it has not been used, and I would like the Representative to join in support of H.R. 1157 – a bi-partisan bill, sponsored by Bernie Sanders, that will restore the safeguards for customer privacy without undermining the ability of the government to pursue terrorists. Are you aware that virtually every company in our industry opposes Section 215 and supports H.R. 1157 – from the malls to Main Street? – amounting to over 90% of gross retail market share?


Where does the representative stand on this?


If he/she is supporting the bill – express your thanks and restate the importance of this issue to you.


If he/she is not yet on board it helps to leave your name and number and ask for a follow-up call, and ask: How can I help you folks to understand the importance of this bill to our industry, our customers, and your constituents?


************************ ************************ ************************

Phillip Bevis Arundel Books (206) 624-4442

 
bottom of page