The relationship between physical book checkouts and author/publisher revenue is less direct, but the ebook contracts are an attempt to emulate decay and damage to physical books that require periodic repurchases. Arguably you are hastening the end of a physical book's life and its need to be repurchased, or need to stock more copies, by checking it out.
Please don't misunderstand my explanation to be an endorsement of standard ebook lending contracts.
Indeed. The publisher charges universities etc. a one time lump sum to purchase N copies of a book. The author gets next to nothing.
Source: am an author of technical books. Royalties will buy me a few cardboard boxes.
publishers, printers, yada yada must've been important to sell books 50 years ago but are they really necessary today?
Distributing and marketing a book still takes expertise.
edit:
if onlyfans can allow questionable skills be monetized and give millions to the um, performers, surely an author can find a way to sell their own books themselves
My books are both in eBook format and paperback. ~400-500 hundred pages in length. The hundreds of hours spent writing the book/taking screenshots, formatting, does not pay off, at least for technical books.
Creating technical books is purely for the notoriety, possibly job prospects, etc., IME. I've had wonderful community feedback which is certainly a self-esteem boost (maybe ego, which isn't necessarily a good thing :)), but it is only going to buy me a few cups of coffee at Starbucks.
Other people, you loan them one paperback book, and when you get it back it looks like it's been dropped off a highway overpass bridge and run over in rush-hour traffic. Look at other possessions that person has, and you'll see the same thing: they're all beat up and pieces of them are broken.
Some people are just destructive for some reason, and it's entirely from carelessness, not malice.
And then some people simply consider books as objects for use, and not sacred reliques to be touched only with glothes.
(unless we are talking about historical books)
I mean, books or rather the information in them is kind of sacred to me. But the physical objects are just paper, that can be printed out again, if it has been in too heavy use. And heavy use includes them to be in a tightly packed backpack, close to saltwater or rain, among other things. If I would treat books as fragile things, I would only read them at home, which means, I would miss out on them a lot, as I like to go outside and travel.
Anyways the reason to treat library books reasonably nicely (not with gloves, but like a reasonable person) is not because books are sacred. Its because library books are not yours, they are something you are borrowing from someone else. Treating other people's possesions that you are borrowing with respect is just common courtsey.
I'm not talking about treating things as extremely fragile, I'm just referring to being able to use and handle things without somehow destroying them in short order. The people who do this are just like you: they think it's normal and think everyone else is overly cautious, when in reality they're just a clumsy oaf. These are also the kind of people you can't lend tool to, because they'll destroy them, by doing things like using a screwdriver as a pry-bar.
You should not touch historical books with gloves. It is generally correct to use your bare hands. The reason why you would wear gloves while handling a book is to protect you, perhaps because the book has been contaminated with hazardous chemicals or something.
Anyway.
It is also my experience that some people completely destroy their books. I don't know how it happens. I don't think of myself as careful with books. I shove them in backpacks, insert random objects to remember my place, take them outdoors, etc. Yet somehow, the books look much the same afterwards.
Part of this is just knowing how to pack books to avoid damaging them. Simple stuff like putting the spine down. If I'm going outside in the rain, keep the book out of the water. If I'm shoving something in my backpack and there's already a book inside, just check to make sure I'm not shoving something directly into the book.
Sure there is some normal wear and tear that isnt "breaking the book", but if you browse through your library you will find lots of books that were purchased 20-40 years ago that are still in good shape. I don't really think normal wear and tear is very significant.
Libraries argue similarly that the wear-and-tear model is miscalibrated, but they are in a weak negotiating position.
