Dr. Jerry Pournelle has penned a column on electronic publishing found in this week's edition of Byte magazine (subscription required). In the column, it is noted that the Kern County Library pays $20,000 to access databases of articles.  If you look at Universities, the bill is in the millions.  Clearly, something needs to be done (and we all watch the Public Library of Science project with interest!),

The column also discusses the quickly changing marketplace for publishing, and how electronic publishing may allow the authors a means to side-step the publishers. 

I sincerely hope he is right.  Of course, we have been watching the artists in the music industry who proclaim the same advantages from the Internet, yet the RIAA seems to be winning the argument that the net and its tools are bad for artists, not good.

As an interesting coincidence, the WSJ has a clip  (Selling Used Textbooks - B1, July 13, 2004) today on on-line services that will buy back used   textbooks from students (still looking at a maximum 35% return folks).  But yesterday, in the NYT, an article (Online Battle of Low-cost Books) discussed how on-line sales of used books was destroying an important secondary market for publishers. 

And, Congress is engaging in activities that may make electronic texts (and possibly even used paper texts) nigh impossible to obtain (See story on Hatch's INDUCE Act - S. 2560.  If you wish to read Hatch's explanation for this proposal, see my friend Frank Field's blog -Furdlog). 

On many fronts, the publishers are winning the battle to control distribution of "their" content (See budget authorization to empower DOJ to prosecute copyright violations and suggested legislation to require v-chip type controls on your personal PC.)

However, the consumers are getting passionate about books, and online/electronic capabilities, for different reasons.  The cost of textbooks has become a 'kitchen table' issue and is therefore on the minds of the voters as they choose representatives this year.  And, the disabled community has invested considerable energy to require access to electronic format of texts to level the "playing field" of those who need alternative methods of access to learning materials. 

The collision of these two fronts will create a rather violent storm in both the marketplace as well as the government.

Oh, and in the "You can't win department."  The University System of Georgia was forwarded an e-mail from the Governor's office regarding a constituent's frustation in receiving only a few dollars back from the more than $200 he spent on texts for a 20 day semester.  The campus privatized the bookstore years ago, yet instead of praise for the efficiencies of privatization of such commerce, the campus gets slammed for that private enterprises policies.

10:02:49 AM  #  

Net, tech to juice up global entertainment market. PwC says online ads, broadband, mobile communications, and other tech areas will help ring curtain down on years of slow growth. [CNET News.com]
2:45:46 PM  #  

Alan Adler of the AAP has posted a Q&A on e-reserves and the necessary hoops professors/institutions must jump in order to provide to their students.  As was made clear at the May conference, the publishers consider e-reserves to be another name for coursepaks and are watching this situation carefully -- to the point of scanning university servers for such files.  Be aware.
11:12:15 AM  #  

Jerry Pournelle has begun a conversation on the subject of DRM.  The inspiration for his essay stems from a talk Corey Doctorow gave at a conference in Jacksonville (FL).  Pournelle seems to be striving for the truth that is in the middle of debates such as these.  Nonetheless, his essay is thought provoking (a Pournelle trademark, I might add).

11:38:22 AM  #  

test 3 again

 

 

4:46:38 PM  #  

This will not help CD sales.  Who wants to deal with copy block mechanisms that won't let you take the music with you?

Labels to dampen CD burning? [CNET News.com]

10:53:59 AM  #  

Honest officer, I was reading

AT&T beefs up cybersecurity tools [CNET News.com]

which mentioned a study by the Computer Security Institute.  Seeing the blue font I clicked on the link to find the study mentioned.  But, lo, I was shanghaid to a CMP  page which states:

Welcome to CMP Media and our unparalleled collection of techhnology news and information sites. Our primary business objective is to supply the news and information you need to make informed technology and business decisions.

Unfortunately, we cannot satisfy the request to link to our content from the site that referred you to us. That site has chosen to reproduce a significant amount of our content in a manner that we deem to be outside the bounds of fair use on the World Wide Web. We have a major, ongoing investment in producing high-quality, authoritative content and we intend to protect that content vigorously. We have explained our decision to the site in question and asked that they cease the practice of lifting significant portions of our content. We have also advised them of other, acceptable means of linking to our content. We will revisit this decision if and when that site complies with our policies, which are the very same policies we follow when linking to content created by other companies.

[I omitted the icons for CNET pubs]

Thank you for helping us protect our intellectual property.

Best, CMP Media, LLC

So, I suppose we can't begrudge this benign action by CMP to protect its property.  But, am I not someone CMP wants to make a customer?  Why frustrate my efforts to see their property on their site?   

But, you ask, doesn't the CNET respect copyright?  Is there no honor among publishers?

So, we go to the source, yes, we explore the Computer Security Institute.  Well, I see the study referenced in the CNET article.  When I click for the free copy, CMP wishes to identify me and where I work.  I comply and am then shown a page where I may download a report, done in partnership with the FBI for free, with the following stipulation:

The information in this survey may not be reproduced without written permission from CSI

Ah, but if our tax dollars supported the FBI's partnership, does this information not belong in the public domain?

The permission form seems benign, does not talk about payment, just asks the purposes for reproduction, the scheme for distribution, etc.  The form concludes with a place to deny or grant the permission requested.  Hmm...

But, back to the main question -- what's going on with the CNET dispute?  Stay tuned...

10:49:30 AM  #  

Essentially, this act authorizes the US AG to file civil suits against alleged copyright violators. 

Bill Summary (S. 2237)

Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004 - Amends Federal copyright law to authorize the Attorney General (AG) to commence a civil action against any person who engages in conduct constituting copyright infringement.

Directs the AG to develop a program to ensure effective implementation and use of the authority for civil enforcement of the copyright laws, including training programs for qualified personnel from the Department of Justice and United States Attorneys Offices.

'Pirate Act' raises civil rights concerns [CNET News.com]

10:56:25 AM  #  

I will post thoughts later.  But here are my rough notes from the sessions yesterday:

• Focus on Users
• A Compensation model for DRM and Accessibility
• Accessible Technologies
• Rights and Permissions Implications
• Accessibility Legislation

Today's Agenda:

9:15 – 10:00 am               COPYRIGHT BASICS

Eric Slater, Esq., Manager, Copyright, Publications Division, American Chemical Society

 

10:00 – 10:45 am             WASHINGTON UPDATE

Allan Adler, VP, Legal & Government Affairs, AAP

 

10:45 – 11:00 am                    Morning Break

 

11:00 – 12:15 pm             OVERVIEW OF THE DMCA:  ITS PROMISE AND PITFALLS

Jeanne Hamburg, Partner, Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, P.A.

 

12:15 – 1:15 pm                        Luncheon

 

1:15 – 2:30 pm               ISSUES CONFRONTING PUBLISHERS IN THE DIGITAL AGE

E-Reserves—Lois Wasoff, Outside Intellectual Property Counsel, Houghton Mifflin

Open Access—Brian Crawford, VP & Publishing Director, Global Life & Medical Sciences, John    Wiley & Sons

File Sharing—Ed McCoyd, Director of Higher Education and Digital Policy, AAP

 

2:30 – 2:45 pm                          Afternoon Break

 

2:45 – 3:15 pm               PARALLEL IMPORTATION

Joe Marcelle, SVP, Higher Education Group Sales & Marketing, Thomson Learning

 

3:15 – 3:45 PM               “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT”

Stephanie Gertz, Director, Governmental Relations, Riverside Publishing

7:52:14 AM  #  

In a conversation with the General Counsel of AAP, he mentioned a concern of the rising cost of doing business due to the myriad requirements placed upon publishers by state and federal rules, many with the goal of assuring access.  "What harm is done to freedom of the press if the press cannot afford to publish?", he asked.

So, a knowledge tax by any other name smells?

7:36:45 AM  #