Amazon has rather quietly patented "an electronic marketplace for used digital objects".  It is rather difficult to understate the importance of such a concept.  First Sale doesn't apply to digital content.  Amazon knows that, so they have smartly focused on patenting the marketplace tool, because they know the battle to sell used digital goods will be huge and very public.  All the major players will get involved, as this is one of the thorniest issues out there.

But for libraries, Amazon's willingness to get in the game represents a huge opportunity.  If Amazon takes this fight on, the most logical approach would be to advocate for some form of Digital First Sale, which means we could potentially have the leverage we need to "buy" ebooks at a market value rather than the ridiculous licenses eating up our budgets.

But of course, we should learn from Amazon.  They are probably patenting this ahead of time and will build the software before taking on the fight, because they need proof of concept.  They need to demonstrate how they will not hurt the market or increase piracy- something that only Douglas County and the handful of libraries who have followed their example have done.  Libraries all over need to realize the importance of Amazon's approach. They are patenting the marketplace and building the ecosystem ahead of time, because they know they can't get what they want without it.  Our approach has been exactly the opposite.  We ofter abstract arguments and ideas, but have nothing on the table.  

Finally, don't think this makes Amazon one of the good guys.  Please recognize that this is another salvo in the battle for control of the digital economy.  There is no way of knowing if it will actually help us, as Amazon's needs simply happen to meet some of ours at this point.  We need better solutions and leadership on this issue or we will again be left further out to pasture and even less relevant than before.  

Perhaps it is unfair to call a survey "science," but the library community's reaction to this survey treats it like it is science, so I feel justified pointing out that it is just a survey and certainly not conclusive in any way.  The survey supports the far more scholarly Pew research on "Libraries, Patrons, and Ebooks", but suffers from many of the same theoretical issues.

We are in an evolutionary stage in the ebook industry.  The Pew study and the survey fail to even attempt addressing this critical issue. Specifically,  the advent and availability of ebooks has not reached market and social maturity, so we really cannot extrapolate any long term conclusions from these types of studies.  Consumers are still reacting to and absorbing the impact of ebooks.  As in every market evolution, consumers' instincts will be driven by prior experience, which is the primary reason  library patron's are still buying ebooks after checking them out.  They are conditioned to do so.

There is a second reason that is not fully addressed.  That is,  library ebook delivery platforms are so clunky and painful to use that many patrons may have made the same decision I have.  I would rather buy the book than check it out through the library, because the technical ecosystem in libraries is miserable and backwards.  There is no attempt to measure how this may be affecting patron behavior in either the Pew study or the ALA/Overdrive survey.

Which leads us back to the simple reality that the broader and long term effects of digitization has been commodification.  We see this with the internet, and with music specifically.  We will most likely see it with ebooks as well.  The ebook market and ecosystem hasn't reached that stage yet.  But if it does we can expect to see these surveys and studies become outdated rapidly, because the defining characteristic of a commodity is its fungibility- that is, consumers don't care where they get it from, as long as it is available when they need or want it.

I may be wrong.  Consumers may keep their old behavior of wanting to "own" their ebooks.  But the industry here is pushing them away from that by not letting us actually "own" the books we buy personally anyway.  This may not make sense to you if you have not looked into the legality of ebook ownership, but very few ebooks are actually sold outright- to anyone.  Instead they are leased or licensed to a user.   As consumers start to realize this, they may react indifferently, or they may think of ebooks more like data on the net.  As long as they can get to it, they don't care if they own it.  If the second scenario becomes reality (and it has with music), patrons will stop buying ebooks, and these surveys will be irrelevant.

Update: Shatzkin has a similar opinion.