December 2010 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: Amazon charging for PG books
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 02 Dec '10

02 Dec '10

greg said: > Incorrect, at least in the case of > the book the WashPost article was about. > The imprint publisher is Amazon Digital Press. > I'm quite certain this is simply Amazon Inc. > THEY are the publisher. well, yes, i did see that. and i wondered about it. i also checked the 3 other books in the article, and two of them had different publishers listed. so it's not quite as cut-and-dried as we'd like... and it's not as if amazon has to be disqualified from anybody-can-reprint-the-public-domain. heck, google's gonna be going into the business of renting out their library in a _big-time_ way... > This is a partial excuse for making a mistake, > but does not remove responsibility. you're forgetting that there is no crime here, so "mistake" and "responsibility" words don't apply. p.g. left the door wide open, and people are now going through it. what did you expect 'em to do? > I encouraged people to volunteer to do previously > -- the fact that I don't have time to do it myself > doesn't mean I'm against it well then, i must've missed that "encouragement". can you point us to archives where we can find it? i mean, i find it quite easy to believe that you are "not against it". but i trust that you'll understand that stance alone isn't gonna make much happen. i mean, seriously, back when _i_ was contemplating doing projects like this, my full intention then was to become one of the rogue publishers and charge money and use the proceeds to buy health insurance for michael hart, since i assume he ain't got much... i decided against it because it seemed that he didn't like me all that much, but also because i knew that someone would paint me as evil for charging a fee... i just didn't believe it would be someone who is as fully conversant with copyright law as greg newby... -bowerbird

1 0

Re: Amazon charging for PG books
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

keith said: > Really, so then it is perfectly light to take a book rip out > the copyright notice and post the book on the web for free. you seem to be totally confused. the point of the public-domain is that copyright protection has run its course. so nobody owns a public-domain book. including project gutenberg. the copyright has _elapsed_... a book which is still under copyright is completely different. > Duhh, what that I did read the fine print before posting!! educate yourself _fully_ by reading _all_ of the fine-print... don't just pick-and-choose whatever fits your fancy today. besides, that fine print has been discussed countless times. if you've just gotten around to reading it, you're uninformed. *** scott said: > PG deals almost entirely with books in the Public Domain. > There is no copyright to infringe upon. well, actually, there _are_ some copyrighted books in p.g. so if you really want to clamp down on the rogue resellers, see if they've improperly offered those copyrighted works... *** michael said: > So does Barnes & Noble sigh. yes, that's true, and -- as quoted back in the original article in the washington post -- greg did acknowledge that, but added that amazon is one of the worst offenders, because they sell the most books. it's important to note that neither amazon nor barnes&noble are the rogue parties here. they are merely _selling_ e-books being provided to them by the real rogues -- rogue publishers. yes, the booksellers take a cut, and thus they do profit, a bit, but they also suffer more when the public turns bitter on them, so i'm sure they don't particularly _like_ this thorny situation... but -- to repeat it once again, in the hope that it sinks in -- p.g. is responsible for this problem, by not asserting itself as an e-book publisher within the major bookselling arenas. the p.g. name would outsell all of the little rogue publishers, chasing them from scene simply by taking away their _profit_, which is the _only_ reason these (perfectly legal) scum exist... you have no legal authority to challenge them, but nonetheless, you do have the market power to chase them away completely... you could even charge a very low fee -- merely to cover costs -- but _also_ inform people that a free version is always available at your own website. this might require getting some kind of exception from the standard policies of the various booksites -- or it might not, it's not clear from their terms of service -- but if you make a stink, they would _have_to_ accommodate you, because none of them can take the p.r. hit from offending p.g. so here's the question: do you believe in free e-books enough to _fight_ for them? if so, then prepare to crawl into the ring, boys... -bowerbird p.s. this leveraging of public opinion is why, even though i disagree with the thrust of the original article, i'm glad that it was written, because it made people discuss the situation.

2 1

Re: Amazon charging for PG books
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

oh keith, where have _you_ been? _of_course_ it's legal. perfectly so. plus it is _far_ from being unethical. (well, some of these outfits are trying to shut down access to free copies because they claim copyright on their own version, and that indeed falls on the unethical side, but that's some whole other kettle of fish.) educate yourself fully before you post, ok? -bowerbird

3 3

Amazon Singled Out?
by Michael S. Hart 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

So does Barnes & Noble http://goo.gl/yH6s1

1 0

Re: the final report on a 5-year-long bet
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

worldcat knows most all the p-books, plus it can tell you where to find 'em. that doesn't mean brewster will have the will or the funding to scan them. which means we will need to pin our best hopes on google, a thought that becomes less comforting all the time. and that, in a nutshell, is the problem. -bowerbird

1 0

Re: the final report on a 5-year-long bet
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

michael said: > You've got to learn to cut and paste the proof in, > or at least provide search phrases. . . . search my original message for "youtube" and you'll find this: > leading to a sale to rupert murdoch for a cool $800 million... > not the $1.6 billion pulled down by youtube, but still amazing. it was also included right there in your reply... *** michael said: > Please don't confuse MY answers with THEIRS. . . . i don't. but the problem is that it is the internet archive who has been doing all the scanning, except for google. most p.g. e-books come from internet archive these days. if they stop scanning because they think they've done it all, the public-domain is going to be unnecessarily truncated... but maybe i've misunderstood what brewster is saying: > http://internetarchive.wordpress.com/2010/10/22/books-in-browsers-keynote-s… -bowerbird

2 1

Re: the final report on a 5-year-long bet
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Dec '10

01 Dec '10

michael said: > YouTube was left out. . . no, i included it. right there. you just missed it. > selling for much more than the $800M > whopping figure mentioned below. . . > $2.65BILLION. . . my memory said, and still does say, $1.6 billion. either way, it's a lot of money, no doubt about it. and yes, in terms of a surprise, youtube was that. > Not to mention iPods, iPhones, clones, and iPads. . . . iphone as an actual _computer_, yes, that too was something that caught people by surprise. they had little sense before that a phone could browse the web, let alone execute programs... but the ipod touch wasn't surprising after that; it was just an iphone without the phone part... and early ipods per se weren't a surprise at all. no indeed, they were originally condemned as being nothing that hadn't already been before. but if you want to put the itunes store in there, especially once iphone apps hit, i'd buy _that_... > You want a five year prediction???!!! sure! :+) > We will have reached and passed the midpoint > of the S curve growth rate of public domain eBooks, > but hardly anyone will realize it and they will still > be predicting growth curves, huge growth curves, > based on the preceding 45 years growth! > Just like before THE DOT COM BUST. . . . that's a general error you've commented on before. you're right that people are incapable of seeing that. > However, eventually someone will realize that > half of books in the public domain have already > been done and that no way can that growth curve > continue because now they only eBooks left to make > are those based on hard to find paper editions that > are going to be harder and harder to find every year-- > and "The Glory Days" of making new public domain eBooks > are going to be over forever. . .based on current copyrights > as they are being extended. hard to disagree with that. but one dissenting note is that -- even though some people talk as if the public-domain is now fully digitized (for example, recently brewster kahle) -- there still seem to me to be some rather huge holes there... i regularly turn up empty on searches for books i know exist, but they aren't at google and they aren't at internet archive... i think we're being sold a snow-job. > Therefore, we will see a new wave of cuteness in eBooks > and in their cover art, internal illustrations, indices, etc.-- > more and more FEATURES because there won't be > many new book titles to work on any longer. yeah, but to me, that's just a bunch of wasted energy. > People, perhaps only the new generations, will figure > drive sizes have gotten so large there is no reason to delete. already there. > Cellphones will reach saturation levels, more features. already there. > Want more? yes! please! -bowerbird

2 1