# Amazon Enforcing Terms Change on Box Sets in KU?



## CassieL (Aug 29, 2013)

So I saw it mentioned twice that box sets may be getting hit by Amazon enforcing something in the terms of service. Went looking at it looks like the terms were updated in September.

Here's the language I think is being enforced: _"4 Book Eligibility. Because this option is for exclusive content, if you do not control the exclusive rights to your Digital Book or the primary content in your Digital Book, you cannot include it in KDP Select. For example, if your Digital Book consists primarily of content that is in the public domain or licensed by you on a non-exclusive basis (i.e., if others can also publish this content), you cannot include it in KDP Select. We reserve the right to determine the types of Digital Books that we accept in KDP Select. We can choose not to accept your Digital Book in KDP Select or to remove it from KDP Select at any time in our discretion."_

Basically, sounds like box sets where the books in the set are listed separately and rights are held by someone else are not eligible to be in KU. One of the mentions I saw said a box set had been pulled by Amazon as a result of this.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

That's concerning, but permafree technically violates TOS too and they seem to have no problem with that, even facilitating it when asked.

It would suck to have to pull my box sets, as they are good leaders for the authors in them. I'd have to scramble to see if they could be reconstituted from wide novels or something. Hmm....

But I'm letting sleeping dogs lie right now and hoping these are isolated incidents, perhaps because of some other issue.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

That's actually good news. I hope they start enforcing it.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

Why? Do you believe it's hurting you somehow?


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

David VanDyke said:


> Why? Do you believe it's hurting you somehow?


I don't think it's hurting me personally. I also don't have a problem with multiple author box sets. It's when they're in KU that it gets a bit iffy. How can a single author compete with twenty? There's only so much money in that pot of gold every month, having a multiple author box set in KU gives an unfair advantage to that box set.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

I think it's a case of a few who have ruined it for the rest. When you have some boxed sets run with secret groups of incentivised readers, who borrow & click straight to the end to trigger a full page read, it absolutely affects other authors in kU. I can completely understand Amazon wanting to stamp that out.

Amazon is cracking down and in their usual style, use a sledge hammer instead of a scalpel.


----------



## Atlantisatheart (Oct 8, 2016)

***********************************************************************************************
Content removed due to new owners; VerticalScope Inc. TOS Change of 2018. I received no notification of a change to TOS, was never asked to agree to their data mining or sharing of my information, including sales of my information and ownership of my posts, intellectual rights, etc, and I do not agree to the terms. 

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


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

I know I signed contracts giving those in charge of box sets/anthologies I'm in the right to publish my work, so I don't see that should be a problem.

It may be that Amazon has decided to cut these sorts of things out of KU, since they do have lots of pages and can ring up a high pay out, but I think it should be something done in the open, with letters going out and notices being sent that they won't be allowed.

This back-door changing things is a crock. No one I know of has been breaking any rules, and shouldn't be punished because Amazon won't spend money on people to actually check books coming into KU.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

she-la-ti-da said:


> I know I signed contracts giving those in charge of box sets/anthologies I'm in the right to publish my work, so I don't see that should be a problem.
> 
> It may be that Amazon has decided to cut these sorts of things out of KU, since they do have lots of pages and can ring up a high pay out, but I think it should be something done in the open, with letters going out and notices being sent that they won't be allowed.
> 
> This back-door changing things is a crock. No one I know of has been breaking any rules, and shouldn't be punished because Amazon won't spend money on people to actually check books coming into KU.


Should Amazon maker clearer announcements of rule changes? Absolutely!

Is Amazon's motive in this case to eliminate box sets from KU because of their high payout? I'm not so sure. I think the motive, as stated upthread, has to do with books being in a KU box and being wide as separate books. Yes, everyone in a box set has probably allowed the box set organizer to publish their work--but if that right isn't exclusive, anyone in that box set could go wide with the novel at any time, which I think is the concern. The old TOS language would actually have prohibited that, so one could argue that all Amazon was doing was making the prohibition clearer.


----------



## Thetis (Dec 23, 2015)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Should Amazon maker clearer announcements of rule changes? Absolutely!
> 
> Is Amazon's motive in this case to eliminate box sets from KU because of their high payout? I'm not so sure. I think the motive, as stated upthread, has to do with books being in a KU box and being wide as separate books. Yes, everyone in a box set has probably allowed the box set organizer to publish their work--but if that right isn't exclusive, anyone in that box set could go wide with the novel at any time, which I think is the concern. The old TOS language would actually have prohibited that, so one could argue that all Amazon was doing was making the prohibition clearer.


That's not what is happening here. Individual books in KU multi-author boxsets are also exclusive to Select, and those boxsets are being taken down because the titles within them are published on Amazon as well. What Amazon is doing - without warning - is taking down boxsets (not even removing them from KU but taking them down altogether) even though contracts are signed and can be provided, and each book within the set is exclusive to Amazon.

What the updated TOS potentially mean in Amazon's erratic way of enforcing its vague terms of service is that any multi-author boxset enrolled in Select in which the books are published by the individual authors _regardless of their exclusivity to Amazon_ can be unpublished without warning. It has happened. How Amazon is deciding to enforce this is a complete mystery.


----------



## thesios (Sep 7, 2015)

Maybe what they should do is force a .99 pricing for each book in the set

do a 5 book bundle must be price @ 4.95 or more



Atlantisatheart said:


> I've been waiting for them to do this and I can't believe it's taken them this long.
> 
> It's been a bad business model of Amazon to allow these sets in KU, and in the actual store they should have a minimum price range (not .99) depending on the size of the file uploaded. They also shouldn't be allowed to skew the author rankings.
> 
> Now sit and wait for them to get rid of the dreaded permafree.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

It has nothing to do with pricing and everything to do with slowing down KU click farm scammers. Legit authors are getting caught in the Zon's dragnet, as usual.

Sent from my LGLS740 using Tapatalk


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Thetis said:


> That's not what is happening here. Individual books in KU multi-author boxsets are also exclusive to Select, and those boxsets are being taken down because the titles within them are published on Amazon as well. What Amazon is doing - without warning - is taking down boxsets (not even removing them from KU but taking them down altogether) even though contracts are signed and can be provided, and each book within the set is exclusive to Amazon.
> 
> What the updated TOS potentially mean in Amazon's erratic way of enforcing its vague terms of service is that any multi-author boxset enrolled in Select in which the books are published by the individual authors _regardless of their exclusivity to Amazon_ can be unpublished without warning. It has happened. How Amazon is deciding to enforce this is a complete mystery.


I stand corrected. Are you sure that's what Amazon's reason is, though? Is it really that the box set titles are available separately on Amazon (I don't see why they'd care), or is that the box sets have material in them on a non-exclusive basis in general? All the box set components could be in Select now, but if the box set coordinator's right to them in non-exclusive, then hypothetically ninety days from now those books could be wide. From what I've heard, that situation may have arisen from time to time, and that seems a better bet for what Amazon is really worried about.

The "taking them down altogether" part is troubling and not really addressed in the language quoted upthread. My question then would be, how far up the ladder have you taken your protest against that? The first responder is usually a very low-employee, and the explanations are either boilerplate or don't make sense. If I kept pushing, though, I usually got a more sensible answer. In that context, it seems likely that unpublishing the box set could have been an error. It's common for weird things to happen, especially when bots may actually be taking the initial step.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Amazon has ALWAYS reserved the right to not accept any content into KU. That has always been there. They have that right no matter what your book is. 

Amazon has also always said that authors only get paid for the first read a reader does in KU. The boxed sets that have books in them that are also in KU as standalone titles enable an author to get paid multiple times for the same content from the same pool of readers. It just does. A reader can borrow the standalone and read it, borrow the boxed set and read that. Each time, the same content gets a page read. 

If you build a business on a loophole in Amazon's systems, it will always eventually be closed. 

Permafree doesn't matter, no one is making money on that, Amazon separates them completely from the Paid Kindle Store Someone getting 70,000 downloads of a freebie doesn't affect another author. Someone getting 70,000 page reads on a stand alone and that book in a boxed set increases the overall pot of page reads by +70,000 and reduces the overall payout per page for everyone. 

I am a part of a single boxed set in KU that is multi author currently free in the store. We did not publish the stories separately. We've not heard a word from Amazon. But regardless, the experiment just proved really once and for all that KU just converts paying readers to borrowers.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> If you build a business on a loophole in Amazon's systems, it will always eventually be closed.


So true.

It's one of the reasons I don't worry about the cash-grab tactics people use to exploit Amazon's system. The easier and more profitable they are, the more they're used. The more they're used, the larger footprint they leave. Consequently, they're bound to be short-lived.

Somewhat frustrating in the short term, but irrelevant over the long run.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

David VanDyke said:


> That's concerning, but permafree technically violates TOS too and they seem to have no problem with that, even facilitating it when asked.


Permafree is provided for specifically in the pricing addendum. It does not go against the T&C/TOS. Not technically or otherwise.



Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Amazon has also always said that authors only get paid for the first read a reader does in KU. The boxed sets that have books in them that are also in KU as standalone titles enable an author to get paid multiple times for the same content from the same pool of readers. It just does. A reader can borrow the standalone and read it, borrow the boxed set and read that. Each time, the same content gets a page read.


The Select wording is not simply about double-dipping, and getting paid multiple times for the same read. It's about a publisher having exclusive right to publish a given work. In that regard, the wording doesn't go nearly far enough to prevent many of the scams, such as an author/publisher stuffing each of their titles with all their other works and putting those books up in KU.

Surely no lawyer actually wrote this: _"Because this option is for exclusive content, if you do not control the exclusive rights to your Digital Book or the primary content in your Digital Book, you cannot include it in KDP Select."_ That is an attempt to assign the same meaning to the word "exclusive" under completely different circumstances. The meaning is NOT the same in both cases. There's no real compulsory intersection between being exclusive to a venue and being exclusive to a single publisher.

This is, IMO, very sloppily worded.

*But is this new *as of September (when the T&C Agreement was last updated)?

*No. *

The actual T&C doc seems to always be served in a frame, which makes it hard to look for previous versions on the internet. The Wayback Machine (archive.org), however, does have earlier snapshots of the FAQ page for Select, and the following wording is there in April 2016:



> The only books ineligible for enrollment are those for which you do not have exclusive rights for the primary content of the book (i.e., this content is in the public domain or others may also have the right to publish this content). Other factors, including royalty option, price, genre, etc., do not impact a book's eligibility. If you have questions about your book's exclusion from KDP Select, please write to KDP Support by clicking "Contact Us" at the bottom of the page.


I absolutely applaud KDP taking steps to mitigate the rampant and, in some cases, imaginative scamming happening in KU. That KDP seems to be interpretting their T&Cs in such a way as to preclude publishers from not publishing work into KU for which they don't hold exclusive rights is their prerogative. What would be a refreshing change would be to see less wishy-washy language and to see uniform standards applied consistently across all publishers. And to see KDP stepping in faster to mitigate fraud.



AliceW said:


> I think it's a case of a few who have ruined it for the rest. When you have some boxed sets run with secret groups of incentivised readers, who borrow & click straight to the end to trigger a full page read, it absolutely affects other authors in kU. I can completely understand Amazon wanting to stamp that out.


^^^ This. Very much this.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Amazon has also always said that authors only get paid for the first read a reader does in KU. The boxed sets that have books in them that are also in KU as standalone titles enable an author to get paid multiple times for the same content from the same pool of readers. It just does. A reader can borrow the standalone and read it, borrow the boxed set and read that. Each time, the same content gets a page read.


This is probably the heart of their objection, and is probably the most legitimate of objections from other authors (vs. mere baseless complaints about forcing others to price things the way they think they "should" be)--the double-billing.

On the other hand, it's not likely legitimate readers woudl double-read, as most would realize they've read the thing before and quit. That becomes moot if the second-read version happens to be in a box set where the reader then skips tot he next book and therefore generates a page read.

Most of this stuff could be eliminated with genuine page read tracking that requires, for example, one clock second minimum spent on any particular page, so skipping would be irrelevant. Limiting box sets to a lower page read number (2000? 1500) would limit the problem even more. I'd have no problem with that.

The unfortunate issue here is Amazon's selective enforcement again. In real-world governmental terms, selective enforcement of rules or laws undermines confidence in authority and inhibits economic and social activity because of fear, and also encourages criminals to try to game or beat the system. Conversely, consistent and fairminded enforcement of rules and laws increases confidence, economic and social activity, and quality of life, even if the rules are viewed as unjust. People like to know where the genuine boundaries are.


----------



## LGAdams (Oct 29, 2016)

Is there any implication this would apply also to bundles of serial episodes?


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

It's not certain yet if KU box sets are no longer going to be allowed or if they are cracking down on KU box sets that have material in them that was wide. (It may be that the organizers of those sets didn't even know some of the material was wide--some are so huge, 20+ authors, that it would be difficult to police.)

I had a box set on pre-order and called yesterday to see if the rule had changed, and was told it had, and that I had to unpublish a preorder, but they'd be nice and would not put a preorder ban on my account. UGH. However they said they'd let my existing KU bundle finish out its term in December.

Then later, I got a note from the same rep that said KU bundles were fine as long as no stories in the bundle were anywhere other than Amazon. (Granted, it looked suspicously like a form letter, so perhaps it's just a form letter that hasn't been changed.)

So ... 200+ preorders cancelled.

A friend who has an Amazon rep has contacted her. The rep knew nothing about any change in rules.

I am hopeful that if bundles aren't allowed in KU they might at least be allowed to be on Amazon only but not in the program (the rep said even that was not allowed.) That would still be a useful way to run promos and get eyeballs on a series.

TLR: Stay tuned. Still developing.


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

David VanDyke said:


> This is probably the heart of their objection, and is probably the most legitimate of objections from other authors (vs. mere baseless complaints about forcing others to price things the way they think they "should" be)--the double-billing.
> 
> On the other hand, it's not likely legitimate readers woudl double-read, as most would realize they've read the thing before and quit. That becomes moot if the second-read version happens to be in a box set where the reader then skips tot he next book and therefore generates a page read.
> 
> ...


I just wanted to say THIS. Really well said and in addition ...

I'm not in any boxsets and I'm wide with one permafree so far. So you can see my biases, I guess. But this pushback I'm seeing from some people in KU on kboards against permafree is just outright ODD. Really, every book in KU is the equivalent of permafree for those in the program so it is the height of hypocrisy to act like permafree is gaming the system or something. Like Phoenix said is it NOT against the TOS and it harms NO ONE. If you're really concerned with the alleged devaluing of books because of low or no prices then you absolutely should NOT be in KU. BTW I have no problem with people being in KU, permafree or boxsets. But those that do really should think a bit about this odd double standard they've got going.

But I digress ...

Reading explanations on the web from people who have been affected by this "change" or "interpretation" the "issue" is that there's a boxset in KU with book X, book X is also in KU on its own. The fact that Book X is on its own and in the boxset is the violation. The boxset was taken down because of this. Don't know what happened with the individual book. The publisher needs to allegedly have EXCLUSIVE rights to all the material in the boxset to be in KU. That applies ONLY IN KU and likely is b/c of the perception of double dipping on page reads like David explained above.

Also, people have asked above: why would a reader grab the individual book since they already read it/have it in the boxset? Well, it's in KU. There's NO COST to the reader to do so. Even if they don't read it again, they give a rank boost to that favored author's book by borrowing it. There are a lot of sophisticated readers who know this and some authors in box sets request they do it. It costs the reader nothing and the reader gets to "help" an author out. I'm not judging this one way or another. I'm just saying this is likely why this is done.

This change I imagine sucks hard for people who are in or thought to be in those sets. Think about it, instead of a SECOND pathway to find your book, its the ONLY pathway. You have to unpublish your book while its in the set (IF YOU'RE IN KU) and lose rank, etc. on your individual version of the book. If people find the second in the series and go to find the first, they won't find it unless they somehow track down the boxset.

But yeah, this isn't about PRICING. This is about Amazon not wanting any double-dipping.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> But yeah, this isn't about PRICING. This is about Amazon not wanting any double-dipping.


If the change is really happening (and not sure that it is at this point) I don't understand why it wouldn't be against TOS to have a box set exclusively on Amazon but not in Kindle Unlimited.

So everyone knows, it is still legit to have a multi-author box set / anthology in Kindle Unlimited, as long as the other works in the set ARE not published separately anywhere else. This is DEFINITE at this point. I was planning on having 3 anthologies like this in 2017 so I'm cool.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

X. Aratare said:


> Really, every book in KU is the equivalent of permafree for those in the program so it is the height of hypocrisy to act like permafree is gaming the system or something. Like Phoenix said is it NOT against the TOS and it harms NO ONE. If you're really concerned with the alleged devaluing of books because of low or no prices then you absolutely should NOT be in KU. BTW I have no problem with people being in KU, permafree or boxsets. But those that do really should think a bit about this odd double standard they've got going.


No, being in KU is not the same as having a permafree. At all. When I'm in KU, I'm not allowed to have a permafree and all the benefits that come with that. If I'm being exclusive to Amazon, I would like permafree to be one of the benefits of that.

To make it clear, my problem with the permafree thing is not with the authors using it, but with Amazon itself for allowing it.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

SummerNights said:


> How could Amazon not allow it when every other channel does? Permafree is a great tool for both authors AND retailers. They all benefit from it as it generates sales and profits. It's not going to go away and as long as Amazon wants to price-match everything, well, they have no option but to allow it or they'd look quite ridiculous.


Then they could at least allow KDP-exclusive authors to use it as well. Otherwise, authors who aren't exclusive to Amazon are getting an unfair advantage over those that are.


----------



## Atlantisatheart (Oct 8, 2016)

***********************************************************************************************
Content removed due to new owners; VerticalScope Inc. TOS Change of 2018. I received no notification of a change to TOS, was never asked to agree to their data mining or sharing of my information, including sales of my information and ownership of my posts, intellectual rights, etc, and I do not agree to the terms. 

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


----------



## Atlantisatheart (Oct 8, 2016)

***********************************************************************************************
Content removed due to new owners; VerticalScope Inc. TOS Change of 2018. I received no notification of a change to TOS, was never asked to agree to their data mining or sharing of my information, including sales of my information and ownership of my posts, intellectual rights, etc, and I do not agree to the terms. 

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


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

Atlantisatheart said:


> It's bad enough amazon have allowed non exclusive authors to use their AMS service - that shouldn;t be allowed either, but Amazon are getting greedy.


Not surprised they did that ($$$) but it still felt like a slap in the face.


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

C. Gockel said:


> If the change is really happening (and not sure that it is at this point) I don't understand why it wouldn't be against TOS to have a box set exclusively on Amazon but not in Kindle Unlimited.
> 
> So everyone knows, it is still legit to have a multi-author box set / anthology in Kindle Unlimited, as long as the other works in the set ARE not published separately anywhere else. This is DEFINITE at this point. I was planning on having 3 anthologies like this in 2017 so I'm cool.


I think you misunderstood me. The box set was ALSO in KU. That was the problem. Boxset and individual book both in KU, double reads.


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

NeedWant said:


> No, being in KU is not the same as having a permafree. At all. When I'm in KU, I'm not allowed to have a permafree and all the benefits that come with that. If I'm being exclusive to Amazon, I would like permafree to be one of the benefits of that.
> 
> To make it clear, my problem with the permafree thing is not with the authors using it, but with Amazon itself for allowing it.


When you're in KU and you give your book away free, you ALSO get PAID for reads if people in KU borrow it rather than "buy" it for $0. People in KU MAKE MONEY when their books are free ON THOSE BOOKS.

You also have the major benefit of getting the same ranking boost as a SALE when you have a BORROW. I have a subscription site, believe me that a SALE is much harder to make than a BORROW. Stories that people would never buy they will borrow because its part of their plan. So your books are getting the same/more boosts than mine even though you are only getting borrowed.

You also get the benefit of 70% royalty rate in countries that I do not by being in Select. I only get 35% in some countries no matter what I price at.

But here's the deal: if KU gave you NO BENEFITS, or actually was DETRIMENTAL to you, why would you be in it? Why wouldn't you be wide? Sounds to me, if you really think Permafree is the end all/be all and taking away your only benefit under KU then shouldn't you be wide? But you're not. Why? Because KU gives you GREATER VISIBILITY which means MORE MONEY from reads that you're making from sales. So give us wide authors a break here and leave permafree alone.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Perhaps we need a standard definition of "double-dipping."

If we look at the way the prohibition is worded, it very clearly says the _publisher_ must hold exclusive rights to all the works they are publishing.

This means that any individual author who has not granted anyone else rights (exclusive or not) to their works may publish that content in KU. So if I, as an individual author, wish to box up my personal work and offer it in both individual and box set formats in KU, I'm free to do this. Again, as I mentioned above, this particular rule _by itself _does not preclude an author from publishing 10 different box sets in KU all containing the same 10 books. (That prohibition is buried elsewhere regarding undifferentiated content.)

If I'm a publisher and have, for example, 4 authors with 4 books each who have granted me exclusive publishing rights, I can sell all 16 of those books individually, create four 4-book box set of each author's books, and create a multi-author box set of the first 4 books in each author's catalog and sell all of those via Select. There is no prohibition against double-dipping in that regard.

That, at least, is my understanding of the T&C language and of the definition of double-dipping. KDP allows me to double-dip if, as the publisher, I have exclusive rights to all the content, but not if I don't. So I'm not seeing how this is a ban against double-dipping in general. Can someone help explain the position that it is?


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

PhoenixS said:


> Perhaps we need a standard definition of "double-dipping."
> 
> If we look at the way the prohibition is worded, it very clearly says the _publisher_ must hold exclusive rights to all the works they are publishing.
> 
> ...


I only know in the situation where the boxset was taken off sale was that the party publishing it was not the author of the individual book that was also being offered in KU by that author. So Book X was being published on KU by Author of Book X AND it was included in the boxset published by Publisher Y.

I, personally, was only guessing that it's double dipping. I am certain though it has nothing to do with pricing nor being wide versus in KU. So you could be right that double dipping isn't what this particular rule is about though I'm having a hard time then understanding the need for it.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

X. Aratare said:


> But here's the deal: if KU gave you NO BENEFITS, or actually was DETRIMENTAL to you, why would you be in it? Why wouldn't you be wide? Sounds to me, if you really think Permafree is the end all/be all and taking away your only benefit under KU then shouldn't you be wide? But you're not. Why? Because KU gives you GREATER VISIBILITY which means MORE MONEY from reads that you're making from sales. So give us wide authors a break here and leave permafree alone.


The only benefit of being exclusive is KU, and that's about it sadly. Non-exclusive authors get permafree and a greater chance of getting a Bookbub.

KU is nice and all and the rank boost from borrows is lovely, but I want more benefits than just that. AMS, permafree, I want it all.

PS: Every time you CAPITALIZE a word, I get terribly TRIGGERED. It's causing me UNNEEDED anxiety and I DON'T like it.


----------



## Guest (Dec 24, 2016)

NeedWant said:


> The only benefit of being exclusive is KU, and that's about it sadly. Non-exclusive authors get permafree and a greater chance of getting a Bookbub.
> 
> KU is nice and all and the rank boost from borrows is lovely, but I want more benefits than just that. AMS, permafree, I want it all.
> 
> PS: Every time you CAPITALIZE a word, I get terribly TRIGGERED. It's causing me UNNEEDED anxiety and I DON'T like it.


The solution could be simple. Keep some things in KU, take some things wide, try permafree with one series while keeping the other in KU and see what works best. It's worked nicely for me. One thing's for sure, Amazon doesn't care what we want.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

From the rep of a big Kahoona:

"The only change is that we’re trying to make it more clear that if you enroll a boxset in Select, all of the individual books also need to be exclusive to Amazon. Same policy as it’s always been though. It’s hard to investigate what exactly was communicated by customer service without an ASIN, but if you find that, let me know."

So, the rep who talked to me didn't know what she was talking about and now I have to rebook all promos, etc.

NOT HAPPY.


----------



## Guest (Dec 24, 2016)

C. Gockel said:


> From the rep of a big Kahoona:
> 
> "The only change is that we're trying to make it more clear that if you enroll a boxset in Select, all of the individual books also need to be exclusive to Amazon. Same policy as it's always been though. It's hard to investigate what exactly was communicated by customer service without an ASIN, but if you find that, let me know."
> 
> ...


That's terrible! I'm so sorry this happened to you. Why would they even pretend they know what they're talking about when they obviously have no clue?

It seems to be the case though that, like Phoenix said, double-dipping isn't the issue here.


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

NeedWant said:


> The only benefit of being exclusive is KU, and that's about it sadly. Non-exclusive authors get permafree and a greater chance of getting a Bookbub.
> 
> KU is nice and all and the rank boost from borrows is lovely, but I want more benefits than just that. AMS, permafree, I want it all.
> 
> PS: Every time you CAPITALIZE a word, I get terribly TRIGGERED. It's causing me UNNEEDED anxiety and I DON'T like it.


You get triggered by capitalized words ... okay, I'll try this without.

Look, you're not going to get it all and I'm not sure if you're really thinking you deserve it or something or trying to be funny.

Amazon believes that by giving you, 5 free days per 3 months, 70% in all countries, and rank boosts for borrows that are the equivalent of sales is fair exchange for exclusivity. And, that last part is really what matters. Think about if all your borrows were removed from the boost of ranks equation or if they were devalued, which they likely will be at some point just as Amazon did when free and paid books were ranking together, that would be a pretty big blow. That's the value of KU. The rest? Window dressing.

SummerNights has a solution for you that will allow you to compare if permafree will work better than KU. Try that. But if you're holding your breath for Amazon to make permafree only available to Select ... well, you'll be getting blue in the face. They already made AMS open to everybody. Doesn't seem like they are pulling stuff back for exclusives.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

My guess is that when the language was put in place it was to cover:
1) Public domain content.
2) Claims by author/publishers that they were given permission to publish a book, and because they (the publishers) were exercising their right to publish and were publishing exclusively to Amazon, then they were in fact meeting the terms of Select regardless of whether the author or other rights holders were publishing wide or not.

The language has been there for several months, and was likely included to forestall scams that were originating from the scenarios above. Now, it appears, the enforcement of that language is being broadened to curtail other behavior Amazon is finding in their estimation to not be in the best interest of the Select program.



C. Gockel said:


> From the rep of a big Kahoona:
> 
> "The only change is that we're trying to make it more clear that if you enroll a boxset in Select, all of the individual books also need to be exclusive to Amazon. Same policy as it's always been though. It's hard to investigate what exactly was communicated by customer service without an ASIN, but if you find that, let me know."


Maybe a third opinion as a tie-breaker is warranted. What's to say this rep knows what they're talking about? (And yes, I see dissenting information by various author reps quite a bit.)


----------



## blubarry (Feb 27, 2015)

I've done KU boxsets, and have done well with them, but would be happy with the change (and think that if Amazon is not moving toward it now, it will eventually). It's not about double dipping, but scamming. That was the point of the 3k pages per title. I've seen several boxset publishers where the organizer incentivizes readers to click through to the end, even on legitimate bundles of books. Keep multiauthor bundles (excluding anthologies) out of KU, price however you want, and call it good.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Remember the "boxed set scams" thread from a week or two ago? I think we're seeing the result of some bad organizer behavior, including the kinds of things I listed in this post:

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,243297.msg3418083.html#msg3418083

This appears to be multi-author boxed sets only. And all I'm hearing about is a couple organizers who were perhaps doing some of that stuff. Again: don't buy into sets where there's a lot of smoke around the organizer! Especially if the buy-in is big. Will YOUR books actually make more money, once you get past x ranking/making a list? And remember it is your account you're risking.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

SummerNights said:


> The solution could be simple. Keep some things in KU, take some things wide, try permafree with one series while keeping the other in KU and see what works best. It's worked nicely for me. One thing's for sure, Amazon doesn't care what we want.


I've thought about that but I don't know if I should do it under the same pen name. Plus, I like the simplicity of having everything in one place.



X. Aratare said:


> You get triggered by capitalized words ... okay, I'll try this without.
> 
> Look, you're not going to get it all and I'm not sure if you're really thinking you deserve it or something or trying to be funny.
> 
> ...


The rank boost is great. 5 free days per three months? Not so much. It's a limitation. 70% in all countries? Not a perk since most of those countries don't even buy that many English-language ebooks.

And yeah, I'm definitely not holding my breath on Amazon doing the right thing for those of us that are exclusive to them. They've made it clear they don't really care much about us. They might regret that in the future.

PS: And thank you for not capitalizing every other word. It makes your post a lot easier to read and it makes you sound more reasonable to boot.



TwistedTales said:


> Of course, none of this would exist if they could actually count pages.


We already have a huge thread about that. There's no need to bring it into this topic.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> This appears to be multi-author boxed sets only. And all I'm hearing about is a couple organizers who were perhaps doing some of that stuff. Again: don't buy into sets where there's a lot of smoke around the organizer! Especially if the buy-in is big. Will YOUR books actually make more money, once you get past x ranking/making a list? And remember it is your account you're risking.


For the record, when I work with paid box sets I never ask for buy-in. My friend's rep is going to help us get the pre-order back up, hopefully on Monday.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> Why would they even pretend they know what they're talking about when they obviously have no clue?


I talked to a standard rep--someone there to answer the phone. She was obviously not a native English speaker, and I think she was confused. I don't really want to get her fired, it's Christmas gosh darn it.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

C. Gockel said:


> For the record, when I work with paid box sets I never ask for buy-in. My friend's rep is going to help us get the pre-order back up, hopefully on Monday.


I'd never imagine you would do anything shady. I think the boxed set deal will continue to evolve. I suspect at some point you won't be able to put them into KU at all. Just too hard to keep out the scammers and "fishy" things--like people having 10 books and 10 boxed sets with the books in different order and the rest as "bonus."

I've been thinking there are a couple ways a person can do things. One way is to jump on every new opportunity Amazon offers, reacting--writing super-short with KU1, bundling for KU2, etc.. The other way is just to go on and write your books and have sort of a "reader-centric" approach--writing the way your readers like best and presenting those books in a straightforward way. The first way can be scammy or legit. Personally, it all sounds very tiring, so I just go on and write my stuff same as it ever was.

In any case, thinking or talking about what Amazon "should" do, or what's "fair"--in my 4+ years in this business, that doesn't seem to have gotten any author anywhere. As much of an author sport as it seems to be, I've never seen the point. This business is young and evolving. All you can really do is recognize and adapt to the extent that suits you, making your choices based on the new reality.

(The above not directed at individual you. Just in general.)


----------



## Not any more (Mar 19, 2012)

X. Aratare said:


> Really, every book in KU is the equivalent of permafree for those in the program so it is the height of hypocrisy to act like permafree is gaming the system or something.


Please send me $10 a month. It shouldn't bother you since it's the equivalent of free.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

PhoenixS said:


> Perhaps we need a standard definition of "double-dipping."
> 
> If we look at the way the prohibition is worded, it very clearly says the _publisher_ must hold exclusive rights to all the works they are publishing.
> 
> ...


Well, if this is in fact happening, it could be about double-dipping in a _de facto _way, since so few of us would be willing to turn over exclusive rights to the first novel in a series to a boxed-set organizer. Most boxed-set organizers are just normal folks, not publishers running established, well reputed companies like Steel Magnolia. We've seen that occasionally the proceeds of boxes go astray. If exclusive rights had been assigned to the organizer, there'd be nothing the included authors could do in the case of malfeasance, aside from suing. They couldn't even get the box taken down. And who knows what other mischief an organizer might get up to. So I for one would be pretty hesitant to sign off on those rights, even for just three months, not when the remainder of the series depends on the fate of that book. Amazon could be banking on the hope that many authors would hesitate in the same way.

But I suspect it's more about fighting scammers, putting the kibosh on huge payouts for 3,000-page books, and keeping Amazon imprint books (which, as single novels, might not look as juicy as a 10-book collection) competitive in the KU ecosystem.

Hopefully the rep Carolynn's friend spoke to is correct, and there's no real change here.



NeedWant said:


> The only benefit of being exclusive is KU, and that's about it sadly. Non-exclusive authors get permafree and a greater chance of getting a Bookbub.
> 
> KU is nice and all and the rank boost from borrows is lovely, but I want more benefits than just that. AMS, permafree, I want it all.


I understand wanting more benefits, but those of us with books outside KU are helping keep the other retailers competitive, and it seems to me there's value in that. If Amazon really upped KU's attractions -- which are already substantial ... otherwise there wouldn't be so many authors using it -- many of us would probably give up and join. Selection would go down even more at other retailers, and Amazon would gobble more market share. That'd be fine in the short term for people in KU, but a future in which Amazon has no meaningful competition gives me the willies.

The current situation, where both approaches have attractions, seems good to me. If I were to try to go full-time as an author, I'd almost certainly do a second series and put it in KU. Having a toe in both seems like the best of all worlds.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> KU is nice and all and the rank boost from borrows is lovely, but I want more benefits than just that. AMS, permafree, I want it all.


You can have a permafree and be in KU. This is a permafree short story collection I am in: https://www.amazon.com/Star-Rebels-Stories-Exploration-Adventure-ebook/dp/B01H7J5Z38/

My short story in it is a lead-in to my Archangel series. I've found that non-Amazon fans are about 76% likely to buy a book by an author they like on Amazon.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

NeedWant said:


> Then they could at least allow KDP-exclusive authors to use it as well. Otherwise, authors who aren't exclusive to Amazon are getting an unfair advantage over those that are.


KU is your advantage. Permafree is what those of us who don't play that game use to level the playing field. I doubt it's going away, since it's allowed on all other sites. The last thing Amazon wants is for readers to be shopping on ibooks and Barnes and nobles or Google Play because that's where the free stuff is.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

C. Gockel said:


> You can have a permafree and be in KU. This is a permafree short story collection I am in: https://www.amazon.com/Star-Rebels-Stories-Exploration-Adventure-ebook/dp/B01H7J5Z38/
> 
> My short story in it is a lead-in to my Archangel series. I've found that non-Amazon fans are about 76% likely to buy a book by an author they like on Amazon.


OMG, your cover for _Heretic_, C. ... <drool!>

/derail

ETA: Who made that?

/4realz/derail


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> OMG, your cover for Heretic, C. ... <drool!>


Archangel Down, Noa's Ark, and Heretic covers were all done by Tom Edwards. And YES that one is my favorite of the bunch!

Oh, and in case it isn't obvious, the short story that is permafree isn't in Kindle Unlimited. The series it begins is in Kindle Unlimited. No Amazon TOS violations there!


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

Becca Mills said:


> I understand wanting more benefits, but those of us with books outside KU are helping keep the other retailers competitive, and it seems to me there's value in that. If Amazon really upped KU's attractions -- which are already substantial ... otherwise there wouldn't be so many authors using it -- many of us would probably give up and join. Selection would go down even more at other retailers, and Amazon would gobble more market share. That'd be fine in the short term for people in KU, but a future in which Amazon has no meaningful competition gives me the willies.
> 
> The current situation, where both approaches have attractions, seems good to me. If I were to try to go full-time as an author, I'd almost certainly do a second series and put it in KU. Having a toe in both seems like the best of all worlds.


That's a really good point. I definitely don't want Amazon to be the only game in town. That would be awful for authors because then they could get away with giving us less and less. The question is why haven't they done that? They obviously can.

I've been thinking of making my upcoming UF series wide but then I see a lot of them doing well in KU. I guess I could start in KU and see how it does. KU/Select, for all my complaining, is a lot more attractive to me than the idea of going wide and trying to build a readership on all those other platforms.



C. Gockel said:


> You can have a permafree and be in KU. This is a permafree short story collection I am in: https://www.amazon.com/Star-Rebels-Stories-Exploration-Adventure-ebook/dp/B01H7J5Z38/
> 
> My short story in it is a lead-in to my Archangel series. I've found that non-Amazon fans are about 76% likely to buy a book by an author they like on Amazon.


I meant having a book be permafree while still being in Select. Now that might make things interesting! Getting the borrowers _and_ the buyers hooked at the same time. The universe might implode. 



katrina46 said:


> KU is your advantage. Permafree is what those of us who don't play that game use to level the playing field. I doubt it's going away, since it's allowed on all other sites. The last thing Amazon wants is for readers to be shopping on ibooks and Barnes and nobles or Google Play because that's where the free stuff is.


KU is certainly nice to have (it accounts for half my income) but I want the option of a permafree too! Does that make me greedy? Perhaps, but I don't care!


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

NeedWant said:


> That's a really good point. I definitely don't want Amazon to be the only game in town. That would be awful for authors because then they could get away with giving us less and less. The question is why haven't they done that? They obviously can.
> 
> I've been thinking of making my upcoming UF series wide but then I see a lot of them doing well in KU. I guess I could start in KU and see how it does. KU/Select, for all my complaining, is a lot more attractive to me than the idea of going wide and trying to build a readership on all those other platforms.
> 
> ...


Not greedy, but saying it's an unfair advantage to authors out of KU is the same as authors saying KU is an unfair advantage. I mean the choice is yours. No one forces you in or out, so you picked the advantage you thought would work best for you. That's all you can do because I highly doubt Amazon will ever give you both, unlike other sites who encourage you to set as many free as you like because they're smart enough to know it breeds sales.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

katrina46 said:


> Not greedy, but saying it's an unfair advantage to authors out of KU is the same as authors saying KU is an unfair advantage. I mean the choice is yours. No one forces you in or out, so you picked the advantage you thought would work best for you. That's all you can do because I highly doubt Amazon will ever give you both, unlike other sites who encourage you to set as many free as you like because they're smart enough to know it breeds sales.


The whole point of being exclusive is to have advantages over those that aren't. Non-exclusive authors have a much higher chance of getting a Bookbub, and we all know what a career changer that can be. A permafree is not much to ask for in the grand scheme of things!


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

NeedWant said:


> The whole point of being exclusive is to have advantages over those that aren't. Non-exclusive authors have a much higher chance of getting a Bookbub, and we all know what a career changer that can be. A permafree is not much to ask for in the grand scheme of things!


It might be the point, but that doesn't mean it works that way for everyone, or everyone would do it.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here (Apr 8, 2013)

NeedWant said:


> The whole point of being exclusive is to have advantages over those that aren't. Non-exclusive authors have a much higher chance of getting a Bookbub, and we all know what a career changer that can be. A permafree is not much to ask for in the grand scheme of things!


Agree. _Unfair_ might be a strange word to use in regards to KU and/or permafree.  KU is an option of Amazon's KDP program & available to any author who publishes on Amazon who agrees to the terms. It's business; part of being successful in business is adapting to change and utilizing methods to sell your product. A businessman that has more income to spend on marketing might sell more product than one who has less marketing money. One who uses permafree might see higher sell through of a series vs an author who doesn't use the method. An author who utilizes KU might sell more books (or not lol!) than an author who doesn't put books in KU. Selling books in this industry isn't inherently fair. It's just business.


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

NeedWant said:


> The whole point of being exclusive is to have advantages over those that aren't. Non-exclusive authors have a much higher chance of getting a Bookbub, and we all know what a career changer that can be. A permafree is not much to ask for in the grand scheme of things!


Exclusive authors do have an advantage over those who aren't. They get bumps in rank for every borrow, and they get paid for pages read, so they have the potential to make quite a bit more money without having to go out and build a readership on other platforms. That strikes me as a pretty good benefit, when you consider how difficult it can be to build a readership elsewhere, and how much money one could potentially lose while trying to do so.

But, just because exclusive authors are entitled to benefits that non-exclusive authors don't get, does not mean that they're entitled to all the advantages everywhere ever.

The fact that non-exclusive authors have a better chance of getting a Bookbub really has no bearing on anything, because it's not a benefit offered by Amazon and is beyond Amazon's control. It just happens to be a benefit that falls in non-exclusive author's favor. I bet Select authors wouldn't complain if BB favored them over authors who were wide.


----------



## ......~...... (Jul 4, 2015)

ebbrown said:


> Agree. _Unfair_ might be a strange word to use in regards to KU and/or permafree.  KU is an option of Amazon's KDP program & available to any author who publishes on Amazon who agrees to the terms. It's business; part of being successful in business is adapting to change and utilizing methods to sell your product. A businessman that has more income to spend on marketing might sell more product than one who has less marketing money. One who uses permafree might see higher sell through of a series vs an author who doesn't use the method. An author who utilizes KU might sell more books (or not lol!) than an author who doesn't put books in KU. Selling books in this industry isn't inherently fair. It's just business.


You're completely right. At the end of the day this is a business and each of us have choices to make. I don't spend much time screaming "It's not fair!" into the ether. If I'm not doing as well as I like, I look at the things I can control. That's why I'm looking to increase my output in 2017. I'm definitely not waiting on Amazon to do anything to help me out. In fact, I dread what kind of monstrosity they're going to come up with next! KU3? I shudder to think what that would look like.



ShayneRutherford said:


> Exclusive authors do have an advantage over those who aren't. They get bumps in rank for every borrow, and they get paid for pages read, so they have the potential to make quite a bit more money without having to go out and build a readership on other platforms. That strikes me as a pretty good benefit, when you consider how difficult it can be to build a readership elsewhere, and how much money one could potentially lose while trying to do so.
> 
> But, just because exclusive authors are entitled to benefits that non-exclusive authors don't get, does not mean that they're entitled to all the advantages everywhere ever.
> 
> The fact that non-exclusive authors have a better chance of getting a Bookbub really has no bearing on anything, because it's not a benefit offered by Amazon and is beyond Amazon's control. It just happens to be a benefit that falls in non-exclusive author's favor. I bet Select authors wouldn't complain if BB favored them over authors who were wide.


I don't feel entitled to a Bookbub, it's just a fact that they favor wide books. But the permafree thing is definitely something Amazon has control over. The fact that I'm only limited to 5 free days being in Select is a joke.

A lot of authors complain about the evils of KU/Select on a daily basis. This insinuation that being in KU has more than enough advantages and that I shouldn't want for anything more is a bit silly. There's always room for improvement and Select is far from perfect.

At the end of the day, I don't expect anything to change and I act accordingly. But that doesn't mean I don't think there's room for improvement. I also feel the need to speak up when KU books are equated to permafrees, because that's just plain wrong.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here (Apr 8, 2013)

NeedWant said:


> You're completely right. At the end of the day this is a business and each of us have choices to make. I don't spend much time screaming "It's not fair!" into the ether. If I'm not doing as well as I like, I look at the things I can control. That's why I'm looking to increase my output in 2017. I'm definitely not waiting on Amazon to do anything to help me out. In fact, I dread what kind of monstrosity they're going to come up with next! KU3? I shudder to think what that would look like.


You're sharp & flexible and that's why you'll be successful in this biz. Looking at what you can control and working with those factors is something many authors who come here never seem to embrace. Kudos to you.

And happy holidays.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

I think I may have a decent solution (that Amazon will probably never implement, even though it should) to the box set problem.

There are apparently two issues on Amazon's side: the potential for a double dipping scam, and the potential for individual authors to take books in a Select box set and go wide with them at some point. On our side we might add the recent antics of some shady box set promoters, as well as one that worried me long ago--box sets become a product that competes with the separate titles. It may generate more sales and visibility overall, but there is a price in terms of ranking, as the sales are now divided between individual titles and box set.

What Amazon needs to do is provide a virtual box set capability.  An author (or group if all members verify to Amazon what they want) identifies the items he, she or they want in the box set and the price for which the box set will sell. It can be given a separate cover image. However, a buyer gets the separate titles, not one box set file. The buyer incentive is the discounted price.

Think of it like matchbook but involving more titles. Currently, buyers who get the paperback can get the ebook free or at a discounted price. Under my plan, people who buy the box set can get  the books involved at a discounted price.

One sale would be recorded for each title in the set when someone buys it. If the buyer returns the box set, it counts as one return on each title. In KU pages read get recorded for each title as the person reads that title, just as they normally are with books sold individually. There is no credit for titles purchased as part of a box set but not read.

Advantages: 
*No double-dipping, and no way to be wide and in KU at the same time (if the box set is in KU but a single book gets removed from KU, there'd be an automated trigger to pull the box set out of KU, which wouldn't be hard since the box set is really just the components, not a separate products, except virtually; remaining authors could then decide whether to keep the box set as a wide product or put it back in KU w/o the title that went wide.
*No problem with payouts on multi-author box sets--authors specify upfront how to divide the royalties, and Amazon does it automatically. Probably, the best system would be each author gets royalty payments based on discounting his individual title the same percentage the box set is discounted.
*No need to spend the time creating one big file for the box set
*All the exposure benefits of current box sets without hassles on the author end

Disadvantages:

*Amazon would have to spend a little developing new code. Some it already exists, however. Amazon already connects products sometimes, letting people one-click purchase items frequently bought together or a whole series from the series page, as well as discounting matchbook ebooks by tracking paperback purchases. Splitting the royalty among multiple authors automatically would be new, but it wouldn't be rocket science to set up. Tagging the box set items so if one of a KU box set's items is pulled out of KU, Amazon can take appropriate action is new too, but also not rocket science.

Periodically I use the "contact us" button to send suggestions. Usually, I get a form email. When I suggested a version of this idea, I got an enthusiastic response that was not a form email, though nothing ever came of it. Maybe something like it is an actual possibility.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

Given that KDP hasn't even worked at implementing a co-author split royalty system (which authors have been asking for for years), the odds of them implementing anything else that splits a KU payout or page reads is slim indeed. I'd be far more interested in the former than the latter, simply a way to put 2 (or more) authors' names on a book and have the royalties paid out to each, either split equally or at a percentage set by the publishing author.


----------



## CassieL (Aug 29, 2013)

I do like that idea, though, just for my own collections.  Then maybe it would be on a series page and people could get the discounted price I offer when I publish the collection instead of clicking the buy now button and buying each title individually for more cost to them.  (And in one case, paying me less since the individual titles are all at 99 cents so there's that payout difference between 35% and 70%.)


----------



## KelliWolfe (Oct 14, 2014)

David VanDyke said:


> Given that KDP hasn't even worked at implementing a co-author split royalty system (which authors have been asking for for years), the odds of them implementing anything else that splits a KU payout or page reads is slim indeed. I'd be far more interested in the former than the latter, simply a way to put 2 (or more) authors' names on a book and have the royalties paid out to each, either split equally or at a percentage set by the publishing author.


Well, it sort of makes sense because Amazon doesn't really deal with authors. They deal with publishers, and it's really the publisher's job to sort out royalty splits among the various contributors. Having Amazon do it would vastly complicate their payment system and leave them stuck in the middle if there was a dispute. Can't really blame them for not wanting to get involved in that kind of mess.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

emilycantore said:


> Amazon is all about the customer and plenty of these multi-author box sets have been delivering a poor reader experience.
> 
> *snip*
> 
> Anything that screws with the organic rankings gets killed.


On your first point, I don't personally have enough information to know that this is a valid claim. I know when we put together our boxed sets back in 2014 and 2015, we looked for authors who wrote in similar categories and who had similar rankings, although we did let in people who might not have been as big a seller but who had good reviews. I do think some of these more recent multi-author boxed sets with 20+ books are largely designed to maximize KENP via click circles and reader incentives. They are scams in and of themselves, let alone whether the content pleases readers. It would be possible to include 20 great books and still scam Amazon out of KENP so the two aren't necessarily connected although they can be. Someone doing this for a scam profit won't care too much about quality.

BUT

I do agree with your second point. Anything that screws with Amazon's internal marketing and organic ranking gets killed.

IMO, THAT'S part of what has been happening with this latest roll out of KU 3.0. I suspect that Amazon is trying to dampen external marketing and promote its own AMS.

The scams really messed with the organic ranking system Amazon set up to maximize its (long-term) profits via maximizing customer experience. The better customer experience is, the more customers come to and stay with Amazon. The more customers that come to and a stay with Amazon, the more Amazon grows and dominates the market. Growth is job 1 with the Zon. It's getting ready to compete with Alibaba...


----------



## JETaylor (Jan 25, 2011)

C. Gockel said:


> From the rep of a big Kahoona:
> 
> "The only change is that we're trying to make it more clear that if you enroll a boxset in Select, all of the individual books also need to be exclusive to Amazon. Same policy as it's always been though. It's hard to investigate what exactly was communicated by customer service without an ASIN, but if you find that, let me know."
> 
> ...


Just for the record, the sets that were taken down were in Select. And all the books in both sets were exclusive to Amazon. So this does not explain in any manner why they were taken down if this is the rule.


----------



## Steve Voelker (Feb 27, 2014)

NeedWant said:


> The whole point of being exclusive is to have advantages over those that aren't. Non-exclusive authors have a much higher chance of getting a Bookbub, and we all know what a career changer that can be. A permafree is not much to ask for in the grand scheme of things!


I don't know if I'd consider BookBub a career changer. I've had a bunch of them, and they really just amount to a spike in sales for a few days, then everything is pretty much like it was before the promo. Don't get me wrong, they are really great. But plenty of people do just fine without them.

Also, plenty of people use permafree while in KU. Just put book 1 up everywhere for free, and the rest of the series in KU. I did it for a while under KU 1.0, and it was fairly successful. I tried a series in KU again recently, but at the end of the day, the inconsistency in page read reporting (I know there are whole threads about it!) was too much for me. Easier on my blood pressure to just be wide.


----------



## Sophie Kisker (Nov 2, 2014)

I'm trying to absorb all this,  but confusion pursues me.  I have book 1,2,and 3 in KU -  all written by me. I want to put them out in box set A. 

- If 1,2,3,and A are all in KU,  is that ok? 
- If 1,2, and 3 are in KU,  and box set A is not,  but it isn't sold anywhere except Amazon,  is that OK? 

Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

Cassie Leigh said:


> Here's the language I think is being enforced: _"4 Book Eligibility. Because this option is for exclusive content, if you do not control the exclusive rights to your Digital Book or the primary content in your Digital Book, you cannot include it in KDP Select. For example, if your Digital Book consists primarily of content that is in the public domain or licensed by you on a non-exclusive basis (i.e., if others can also publish this content), you cannot include it in KDP Select. We reserve the right to determine the types of Digital Books that we accept in KDP Select. We can choose not to accept your Digital Book in KDP Select or to remove it from KDP Select at any time in our discretion."_


From that wording they are quite right to enforce this.

Two things could be going here and that is some scammers are copy and pasting *public domain* content to build box sets.

The other is that if others have the sub-rights to publish the whole or part content wide, either as standalones or as box sets, there is a good chance of duplication and customer dissatifaction as the works would be published under different titles as part of a bundle. From that wording it does not appear to include legitimate box sets that are also published individually, all exclusive to KU by the same author. I could see this happening with shorter works that are included in another author's/publisher's anthology. Then the author publishes it themselves as part of their own collection via KU.

Where they should crack down is on those who publish individually wide to get the first book free in series, then they include that or all of them in a box set in KU, which is against their TOC. They only get away with it because the box set has a different title.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

I think in the long run, Amazon is going to stop bundles/box sets from being in Select. That would likely be the best way to control some of the spam, or at least make it harder for those with click farms. They may allow single-author bundles, but not allow multi-author things at all, unless it's all original content -- not published anywhere else, Select or not.

I know in the box set I was in, I kept the book exclusive to Amazon when the KU enrollment ended. I think others may have as well, but our understanding was we were okay, not doing anything wrong. But, looking over the revised rules, I think what's happening is that Amazon doesn't want two versions of a book potentially getting page reads (though I don't see a reader reading a book twice through different means -- box set and individual book -- I guess it _could_ happen). So maybe they won't bother with an author's bundles/collections, but rather focus on those sets that have more than one author. That's where the deal with the exclusive rights comes in. You can't have exclusive rights and also have the author publishing the same book.

As confusing and irritating as it may be, we did ask for them to stamp on the scammers. It's the usual thing that people who weren't doing anything wrong -- or thought they were following the rules, at least -- end up hurting. Been there, done that, for sure.


----------



## Guest (Feb 15, 2017)

Thetis said:


> That's not what is happening here. Individual books in KU multi-author boxsets are also exclusive to Select, and those boxsets are being taken down because the titles within them are published on Amazon as well.


Which sounds like double-dipping.

It is one thing to have a single book and a box set available for sale. Customers decide to buy one or the other. But it is quite another to be able to claim part of a pool of money by having BOTH the individual book and the boxed set in select. For example: let's say I already ready your book. Then I select a boxed set through Select that has your book in it. What am I going to do? I'm going to thumb through your book to get to the next story. But there is a probability that the box set is going to get "credited" with page views for me flipping through the book I already read.

Because Select is a POOL of money that has to be shared between all authors, any time an author manipulates the system to double-dip needs to be looked at carefully. Boxed Sets are great. Boxed sets in Select are great. Boxed sets in select when all of the individual books are also in Select? That's double-dipping and isn't fair to the other authors in the pool.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

she-la-ti-da said:


> I think in the long run, Amazon is going to stop bundles/box sets from being in Select. That would likely be the best way to control some of the spam, or at least make it harder for those with click farms. They may allow single-author bundles, but not allow multi-author things at all, unless it's all original content -- not published anywhere else, Select or not.
> 
> I know in the box set I was in, I kept the book exclusive to Amazon when the KU enrollment ended. I think others may have as well, but our understanding was we were okay, not doing anything wrong. But, looking over the revised rules, I think what's happening is that Amazon doesn't want two versions of a book potentially getting page reads (though I don't see a reader reading a book twice through different means -- box set and individual book -- I guess it _could_ happen). So maybe they won't bother with an author's bundles/collections, but rather focus on those sets that have more than one author. That's where the deal with the exclusive rights comes in. You can't have exclusive rights and also have the author publishing the same book.
> 
> As confusing and irritating as it may be, we did ask for them to stamp on the scammers. It's the usual thing that people who weren't doing anything wrong -- or thought they were following the rules, at least -- end up hurting. Been there, done that, for sure.


I agree the chances of a reader rereading a box set novel the reader had already read individually would be slight, but I'm willing to bet Amazon isn't going to want to take the chance. It will go after multi-author box sets first, but it won't stop there.

I don't really think the issue is copyright. It's completely possible to retain your copyright but give a box set promoter a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable license to publish it in a box set, and it would be easy enough to verify that to Amazon's satisfaction. The issue is KU for sure.

I was planning on releasing a box set when I got to the end of my current series, and I still probably will, just as a convenience for readers. However, since the novels in question are all in KU, the box set will not be wide--and it won't be in Select. That seems to be the only way to be sure it won't cause a problem down the road.


----------



## liquidenvy (Apr 18, 2013)

KU is not compulsory. If it FEELS compulsory because it's the best way to earn a living... then by that logic, KU is still an advantage over wide, even with all the drawbacks authors are frustrated about. If KU at any point is not an advantage, by all means, go wide.

I do think that Amazon has adopted a very 'shoot first, ask questions later' policy in order to deal with scammers, though. It feels like they've turned over the decision making to their IT department, who are just looking at it as a program to debug. It's shortsighted, and damaging to their brand.

The good news is, the more they dismiss and overlook their suppliers (authors), the easier it will be for someone else to come along and steal the crown. It's the natural cycle of business, and Amazon might feel immune--they certainly SEEM immune right now--but they're not. The walls of Jericho are tumbling down for the publishers who have dominated this business for the last century. They'll do the same for Amazon if they don't get their heads out of their whatever.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

TwistedTales said:


> Sorry, Bill, but I have to diasgree based on my experience. I always had singles and box sets in KU and they were never a problem. I ran into an issue when book one was out and only on Amazon, but the box set was in. They objected, not to both being in or if one was and the other was out. For reasons that aren't relevant they thought book one was published by someone else. Once it was made clear that wasn't true then they were happy again. Their issue was with copyright. Providing I had copyright for both books and was the only publisher, they didn't care whether both or one were in KU.


Past experience is valuable data, but is it possible Amazon is in the process of shifting position? I could be wrong--I'd have to reread the thread to be sure--but I thought someone more recently was having an issue with the same text in both a box set and a single in KU. Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly.

As I said earlier, I think there's little chance that someone is going to read the same novel twice by accident, but I can see Amazon being concerned about that. Keep in mind that a lot of the KU issues are relatively new.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> My experience is from this month so it's quite current. Their issue was about me holding copyright for both books. Once that was cleared up they had no issue with the enrolment.


If they are both YOUR books, there is no problem. However, if you have a multiauthor antho, and titles are published elsewhere on Amazon you may eventually "get caught" (i hear they just take it down, they don't close your account.)

You can have a multi author KU antho with the books EXCLUSIVE to the anthology.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

TwistedTales said:


> My experience is from this month so it's quite current. Their issue was about me holding copyright for both books. Once that was cleared up they had no issue with the enrolment.


Since it's that current, you must be right.

Wait, though. I'm just rereading your response to C. Gockel. I must have missed something earlier. The box set was in KU. and the single was on Amazon only but not in KU, right? That's not the case I was talking about. Obviously, that works. My concern was a book being offered as a single and as a box set, both in KU.


----------



## Guy Riessen (Mar 27, 2016)

Cassie Leigh said:


> if your Digital Book consists primarily of content that is in the public domain or licensed by you on a non-exclusive basis (i.e., if others can also publish this content), you cannot include it in KDP Select.


This is the relevant part and makes sense. The person hosting the multi-author set cannot prevent any of the authors from changing their book from KDP Select to wide. The person hosting the multi-author set also cannot prevent any of the authors from making their book available in a contest or as mailing list bait or any number of things.

Having a book on KU and available anywhere else is not allowed.

Yes, you could sign a contract between the authors that would facilitate terms and conditions and make it all legally acceptable, but then you're asking Amazon to analyze legal documents every time someone wants to post a multi-author set. Good luck convincing them to do that!

It's even a bit surprising that they appear to be allowing a contract of exclusivity--that will be hard to follow or enforce from their end because it would require monitoring multiple contracts outside their online system. I don't expect that to last either if any violations surface.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

> My concern was a book being offered as a single and as a box set, both in KU.


If you have EXCLUSIVE copyright to the books, a box set can be published in KU and they can also be published singly in KU.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Folks, thanks for clarifying that issue. I appreciate your taking the time.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

Cherise said:


> It has nothing to do with pricing and everything to do with slowing down KU click farm scammers. Legit authors are getting caught in the Zon's dragnet, as usual.


Actually the legit authors are a problem as well. If someone sells a boxed set of ten books, goes to the tenth one, and reads two pages, the read gets calculated as the entire first nine books plus two pages. And since KU is a zero sum game, that takes money out of the hands of other authors.

I'd be nice if they fixed that so that only a page you turn to counts, but they haven't and I'm going to guess they can't do it with the current hardware limitations.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Speaker-To-Animals said:


> Actually the legit authors are a problem as well. If someone sells a boxed set of ten books, goes to the tenth one, and reads two pages, the read gets calculated as the entire first nine books plus two pages. And since KU is a zero sum game, that takes money out of the hands of other authors.
> 
> I'd be nice if they fixed that so that only a page you turn to counts, but they haven't and I'm going to guess they can't do it with the current hardware limitations.


Do we know that for sure? Yes, the calculation is based on the endpoint, but earlier complaints suggested pages wouldn't get counted if someone went through them too fast. If that's true, surely just jumping to the end would be too fast to get credit for the nine other books.


----------



## Guy Riessen (Mar 27, 2016)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Do we know that for sure? Yes, the calculation is based on the endpoint, but earlier complaints suggested pages wouldn't get counted if someone went through them too fast. If that's true, surely just jumping to the end would be too fast to get credit for the nine other books.


Indeed there was something posted about this during the initial crack down on click-farming, although I cannot remember if it was verified?


----------

