Since the parallel imports debate has somewhat quietened down for now, I thought I’d put up a short post with some concluding remarks:
1) In her blog post, Nilanjana Roy accuses me of having demonized the Indian publishing industry. I cannot entirely escape this accusation although I’d temper it, by pointing out that I’ve only targetted big publishing in English in India. All I can say is that I didn’t mean to demonize, only de-divinize. They’re certainly not demons, but they’re not quite the saints they set themselves up to be. I think I maybe overshot a bit, but my objective was, modestly, to attempt to tame the looming sense of catastrophe which has characterized the industry’s response to this amendment. I remain skeptical that there is any evidence which supports their dire apprehensions. This is an industry that has been quite opaque about the way it functions – accurate figures and studies are extremely hard to come by even today – and I don’t think we should be in a rush to indulge their doomsday predictions, however earnestly issued.
2) If there’s one thing that’s clear from these debates, it is that there isn’t clarity on parallel import – either on who’s behind this amendment and what its impacts are going to be. When one puts aside the imagined losses to the “Indian publishing industry” and asks for real examples (which authors, which books, which publishers?), there’s an uneasy silence that takes over. I support Thomas Abraham’s conjecture that it will be popular books in English which could possibly bear the brunt of this amendment. This makes intuitive sense. But this possibility is dismissed by Vinutha Mallya’s statement to the contrary – which also makes eminent sense. I stick by my own conservative guess, that this amendment will simply mean “more of the same” in terms of second hand bookstores. Hardly worth the breast-beating we are now witnessing.
3)One of the strongest arguments that the publishers have made in this debate is that overseas “remaindering” will kill their local market. We’re talking, say, about Penguin India being worried that remaindered books sold by Penguin UK -whose ability to return a profit has been written off – will find their way into the local market and undercut Penguin India’s profits. A very simple way to avoid this is for the UK publisher to desist from remaindering books. This would also ensure that the author’s territorial royalty expectation would be preserved – which appears to be the publishers’ most animating concern. Why is this internal check such an impossible thought? Instead, our publishers want to retain the right to “remainder” (read dump) books, while simultaneously retaining control over the territories where those books might legitimately land up. I think this is at least a little unreasonable, and possibly very parsimonious.
4) I’m puzzled by the term “Indian publishing” – what is the nature of this benighted beast? It seems to me, there’s an ‘Indian publishing’ which counts amongst its members the 90 year old Gita Press, whose sales stood at a healthy Rs 32 crore in 2008-09 (mostly from the sales of Bhagwad Gitas and Ramcharit Manas).However, they are excluded entirely from the “Indian publishing” who are described as “having come into its own in the last decade”, or being threatened by the curent parallel import amendment. If we have to arrive at a referrent for this term, then, we must do so by elimination of the indigenous and the prosperous amongst Indian publishing. Who remains, then to represent Indian publishing in this fight against parallel import? The Hachette-Indias, the Penguin Indias, Macmillan India, Harper Collins-India and the (r)Random Houses of India. And alongside them Roli and Rupa. I’m not impressed by the suggestion that assorted small publishers have joined the chorus to oppose this amendment. Whatever tactical consideration may have induced them to do so, I don’t see anyone making any credible claims that their interests, specially and separately considered, will be affected at all.
5) In response to the charge of overpricing that I (and others) have levelled against the prices of English books, I’ve typically received two varieties of responses. Firstly, that there is a intricate international territorial logic to this state of affairs, that we’re all stuck with, for better or worse. My response to this argument is that it’s business, not biology. Like all industries, book publishing is and should be subject to interference in the Indian public interest. I don’t see why Indian copyright law should operate as a handmaid to sustain an international restrictive trade practice which hasn’t kept the best interests of the Indian consumer’s in mind. So, restrictive-trade-practice should be subordinated to domestic consumer interest. Secondly, it is repeatedly asserted that Indian editions “are far cheaper than the global average”. That, however does not automatically mean that the books are “affordable” to Indians – which was my main point with the comparison with books in regional languages. It is possible to publish affordably priced books in India, as the regional language publishers demonstrate. So the only explanation for the high prices of English books is this territorial licensing regime.
6) Lastly, to prove that I don’t hate the industry, I’ve picked out some of my favourite “Indian Book-Publishing Shining” quotes from newspaper clippings and blog posts.
In April 2009, the Indian high commissioner to the United Kingdom Shiv Shankar Mukherjee described the country’s publishing industry as vibrant and said it is growing at an impressive rate of 30% every year. (Live Mint)
In 2008, The India Publishing Market Profile released the following figures (reproduced from The Publishing Horizon blog)
The total book market was worth around Rs. 10,000 Crore, of which
The school book market may be worth around Rs. 3,500 Crore
The higher education book and journal market may be worth around Rs. 2,500 Crore
The trade book market may be worth Rs. 4,000 Crore, of which the English language segment may be worth about Rs. 2,400 Crore
Some other estimates from Times Emit
- # India is 7th largest publisher in world; 3rd largest English language
- # Estimates for 82,537 titles published in India last year are “way, way too low!” i.e. these are just those which are registered. 16,000 publishers, with 1,000 publishing over 50 p/a
- # 10,000 crores annually
- # 60% educational
- # 40% trade, folk, religious, spiritual
- # 20,000 hindi titles
- # 19,000 English
A quote found in the Prayatna blog from the Preface to a book titled “The Book Industry in India – Context, Challenge and Strategy” published in 2004 by the Federation of Publishers’ and Booksellers’ Associations of India
The vibrant publishing industry in India generates a turnover of approximately Rs 70 billion annually (Rs. 7,000 crores). Around 16,000 publishers in India publish 70,000 titles (estimated) out of which 40% are in English, which makes India the third largest English language publishing country in the world. Exports have grown from Rs 330 million in 1991 to Rs. 3,600 million in 2003.
Here’s a quote from Manas Saikia (homegrown publishing crorepati) and no fan of piracy in the Frontine (Feb 2006)
There is only one true Indian multinational, Roli Books. They have a true international approach and market. ,,Most Indian publishers who have made good, such as S. Chand, Navneet or MBD, invest their profits in property or hotels such as Hotel Tourist in Delhi, Atlantic in Chennai, MBD Radisson in Noida and MBD Airport Hotel in Kolkata. Hence these people, who have the money to go global, do not do so. That is a pity. However, please note that India has become a global leader in digital origination. There are companies such as Tech Books in Delhi, DBS in Pune, e-Macmillan in Bangalore, Intergra in Chennai and so on who employ thousands of people for typesetting and uploading. Homegrown Indian publishers complain about the import of books and loss of foreign exchange. The truth is that international publishers are buying much more out of India than the books that are being imported. At the London Book Fair, there is a “Production” section. If you go there you will find most exhibitors are Indian printers for digital service providers. (emphasis mine)
And lastly a quote from the The Book Standard (March 31, 2005) again from the Prayathna blog
Penguin India president Thomas Abraham is predicting a “phenomenal growth curve” for Indian publishing. He estimates the Indian book market at $823m (£438m, or Rs. 3,500 Crores) with imports of around $36m (£19m, or Rs. 81 Crores ), but Abraham believes the market has massive further potential.
So much for the foretold death of Indian publishing.
All this just to remind readers that Indian publishing does have a spine, and will not be swept away by a motley tide of mere “remaindered” books. Other ways concerned individual editors and publishers could respond, if they still feel threatened is to push for their own branding in books as suggested in this blog post.
At the ideological level, this debate has troubled me since it appears to clash with my native protectionist, anti-free market instincts. For the record, I’m *not* enamored by “free trade” and LPG. I don’t believe markets are best left to themselves. So how does this instinct accord with my stance on the parallel import debate? I think the prevailing arrangements in international publishing are in fact a product of “free trade” undertaken under the shadow of copyright monopolies. The Indian Publishing industry in English is in fact *very* globalized and this is what accounts for the high prices we face (and also possibly the few ‘truly indigenous’ Indian publishers). Protectionism in this context (disallowing parallel import), merely buttresses an already strong global system of price fixing over which Indian publishers have no control. So being anti-global, being ‘nationalistic’ in this context ironically means promoting open access.
Prashant
Pranesh Prakash
Recent Comments