TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home

Archive for July, 2002

By

Another obnoxious, anti-Net proposal–this one from Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, a Democrat carrying water for copyright aristocrats. As reported by Declan McCullagh of CNET, “Biden’s new bill would make it a federal felony to try and trick certain types of devices into playing your music or running your computer program. Breaking this law–even if it’s to share music by your own garage band–could land you in prison for up to five years. And that’s not counting the civil penalties of up to $25,000 per offense.”

The TeleRead take: Sen. Biden isn’t as obvious a property of the entertainment industry as Rep. Howard Berman, but the press would do well to check him out. For the 2002 race, old Joe has received at least $215,200 from the Los Angeles-Long Beach area compared to $542,750 or more from the Wilmington-Newark area. What’s more, the New York area, home to its share of entertaintment companies, has sent Biden at least $360,652. Compare those totals to the geographical breakdown for other senators, such as John Warner here in Virginia.

Granted, both NY and LA teem with other special interests, such as financial services businesses, without the very most direct connections to the copyright wars. And granted, too, OpenSecrets.org shows that Biden has collected a mere $39,324 from the category of “TV/Movies/Music.”

But here’s the catch. Lawyers in various cities have sent Biden at least $798,462, and the inevitable question arises: How many of them are entertainment lawyers or work for firms that are at least partly in entertainment law? Are the law firms building campaign donations into their billing arrangements and pay structures, and what are the implications from an election-law perspective? No accusations of illegal actions, no proven quid pro quos or other violations of law. But I would still urge the press to investigate to get the full picture. For legal reasons, I won’t name lawyers or law firms, but, yes, based on a quick look, Biden’s contributors do include some attorneys with at least indirect entertainment connections through their firms.

The explanation in most cases, of course, is that law firms are department stores of influence–that their donations buy “access” on a number of issues, not just copyright-related ones. Still, Biden is an interesting example of the continuing need for true campaign reform so that copyright laws and others aren’t so hostile to nonmillionaires. Meanwhile, in trying to puzzle out the origins of anti-Net copyright legislation, reporters should pick up a lesson here. Pay attention to the geographical locations of contributors, law firm affiliations, and legal specialities rather than looking just for “entertainment” donations.

By

“The heat has not quite reached Fahrenheit 451, but a furious little row is raging within the bibliophile British, and Britophile French, communities in Paris. To the dismay of its 2,000 users, the British Council closed its Paris lending library-–the only British library in France-–at the end of last month. The last of its 15,000 books (there used to be as many as 70,000) are being crated up and given away to French universities and the new French national library. The space occupied by the old information technology (ie books) in the British Council’s splendid building overlooking the Invalides is to be given over to a computerised ‘knowledge and learning centre’. This will consist of an ‘open-learning area’ and a ‘video conferencing facility’.” – The Independent, July 30.

The TeleRead take: The Brits, of all people, should know better–whether it’s a “library” or a “culture center” involved. See our earlier thoughts on bookless libraries.

By

“Students are often scolded for not spending enough time at their school library, but do not blame them. It is the lack of new books and a comfortable room in which to read them that is the source of the problem. ‘I never want to go to my school library unless my teacher makes me,’ said Maria, who is in her third year at a state high school in Tebet, South Jakarta. Maria blamed the old dusty collection of books and the musty library room for discouraging her from going to the library.” – Jakarta Post, July 27, via Library Stuff.

The TeleRead take: Definitely TeleRead territory. What applies to pulped-wood libraries certainly holds true online. Children are more likely to read if they find a wide variety of modern books, especially those that match their existing interests. What’s more, with a TeleRead business model, they would be more tempted to browse. That could be good news for libraries and publishers alike.

By

Jonathan Yardley warns against government boondoggles for writers. He is right to worry, given all the risks of state-approved culture. This is one reason why TeleRead for the most part would compensate writers and publishers in the same way they get paid now–by the popularity of individual titles. Private foundations could still subsidize writers, but that would hardly be the main business of the library system itself.

Of course, with social needs in mind rather than those of individual writers, TeleRead in a small way could make grants for projects in the tradition of the old WPA efforts.

More importantly, via the efficiencies of electronic distribution, a fully developed TeleRead would send far more money in the direction of writers and publishers than they are receiving today. Also, TeleRead could help draw more private support for the operation of our library system. Prospective donors would know that a good infrastructure existed to spread the books around. Simply put, TeleRead would offer a good value for their philanthropy.

Today most money for libraries goes not for books and other content but for buildings and salaries. Not that TeleRead would end the need for skilled librarians or neighborhood libraries (in fact, TeleRead would empower good local libraries by increasing the range of content available). But it would reduce the need for palatial libraries and armies of book-stackers. The saved money could be a godsend to writers and publishers. Like tech, book publishing isn’t growing as quickly as in the past. TeleRead would help both.

Followup, July 30: Culture czar James Billington, with his jihad against e-book boosters and the untamed regions of the Internet, is a perfect example of the dangers of a giving the government too much power over literature and other forms of creativity.

By

Great suggestions from Inside The Beast–from a Hollywood peon (via Scripting News). Also see Berman-related links from Copyfight, Dan Gillmor’s observations and a New York Times piece.

By

InfoAnarchy quotes a Malaysian report that the country may still fight piracy for commercial purposes but not prosecute users reproducing software for educational purposes.

Now–the twist. InfoAnarchy warns that Malaysia might actually “play into the software industry’s hands”–since the use of commercial software for educational purposes might then compete with the free, open source variety.

The TeleRead take: Microsoft and other companies give educational discounts. Is it possible, however, that they actually should think about freebies? InfoAnarchy raises some interesting possibilities. Certainly a TeleRead-style library would be an efficient way of distributing both open-source programs and the usual commercial software to K-12 students and others.

By

“Brand-Name Authors Hire Writers to Flesh Out Their Bare-Bones Stories” – Headline, Washington Post, July 23.

The TeleRead take: Hollywood is giving us more and more sequels at the expense of orginal, “normal” movies. In one form or another, the MBAs and accounts are winning. Will book-publishing sink to Hollywood’s level? And in the end, will “Robert Ludlum” and “Tom Clancy” live on more as brand names than as the names of actual writers? Another argument for a new business model.

By

“There’s more free downloading of music than ever. The big labels hate it–but shutting down the outlaw networks won’t be so easy this time.” – Headline on article by Melanie Warner in Fortune, August 12.

The TeleRead take: The magazine goes on to say: “Napster operated with central servers that tracked and controlled the transfer of files between users, but Kazaa, Grokster, and Morpheus are completely decentralized” and thus will be harder to shut down. It notes that the industry has bungled “on perhaps the most important front: creating Internet services that people actually like for legitimately licensed music.” Exactly! Just when are the big music companies going to wake up? They continue to offer a terrific negative examples for major book-publishers, which, just like the record labels, don’t offer the most reasonable prices on online products.

An aside: Maybe it’s because the old Time Warner people hate the guts of the AOL upstarts, but some of the most informative reporting on AOL Time Warner continues to come from none other than Fortune. Presumably, by the way, Melanie Warner’s last name is merely a coincidence (and besides, hey, that was a merger or so ago). Any readers know? Meanwhile see our followup on Howard Berman’s dangerous bill to allow the big boys to hack file-sharing sites.

By

“A group of schoolchildren will say goodbye to some of their heavy old textbooks this fall, instead bringing to school a few computer disks. Prosveshcheniye-MEDIA, a subsidiary of the Prosveshcheniye publishing house, is developing the multimedia disks, or electronic textbooks, which will be introduced for the first time this September in science and history classes at around 100 elementary schools equipped with computers throughout the country, including 12 in Moscow.” – Moscow Times, July 23.

The TeleRead take: The story raises excellent questions, such as how well the teachers will be prepared. It does not get into issues such as tablet-style machines vs. desktop PCs. TeleRead would address those matters.

By

“Questions questions questions. Can a small record label run a virus too, or just the monopolies? How about a software company? How about the Department of Justice? Can they install a virus on our systems to look for terrorism and report it back to the FBI? Do you think that would be constitutional? What if there’s a conflict between” a record label’s virus and a car dealer’s virus, which one survives? Can a record label rent space in its virus to do someone else’s bidding?…” – Dave Winer, Scripting News, July 26, discussing Rep. Howard Berman’s bill.

The TeleRead take: Dave Winer and others are trying to organize Netfolks to vote these crooks out of office. It would then be fun to see how many nanoseconds elapsed before Berman and the rest got job offers from entertainment conglomerates–to work for them in a more open way.

Followup, July 28: Winer and Ed Cone note that Howard Berman is apparently running unopposed, but that another congressman with an interest in these matters, Howard Coble, may be approachable–a good thing since Coble “got 91 percent of the vote in 2001.” Ed Cone says: “Individual liberty is part of Coble’s message, and big corporations like the ones who bankroll him aren’t very popular just now. He has another election in two years, and even with the recent gerrymandering that strengthens his political base he would have to pay attention to a concerted information campaign on this issue.”

By

One of the main precepts of TeleRead is that a national digital library system should strengthen rather than replace local libraries–should allow them to set up links and search engines that help local people. Neighborhood libraries also are invaluable as meeting places and potentially as sources of training and other tech-related help.

Now comes an article in the Christian Science Monitor telling how the Web has actually been a boon for local libraries–since people want a human touch in coping with the masses of information available through the Net. More money is actually going for local library construction: “Last year, $686 million was spent on library construction – the second-highest dollar total ever spent, and a 15 percent increase over a decade ago, American Library Association data shows. Aside from the construction of 80 new libraries, 132 existing ones underwent renovations: creating new space, wiring old buildings for high-speed Internet access, and buying computers.”

Still, it isn’t as if the typical library is swimming in cash. A well-stocked national digital library system would be an excellent way to stretch resources. The other fact to consider is that as hardware improves and broadband connections become standard, then more people will be using technological resources at home.

(Via Library Stuff.)

By

I pulled out of just about all my AOL Time shares at around $16, far above yesterday’s close at $9.64, but I should have done so much earlier.

The really nefarious thing about the post-merger AOL was that it once seemed a reasonable hedge against corporately promoted copyright laws that could wreak havoc on Net-oriented writers and editors like me. I believed that the officers of the company would be at least somewhat responsible about earnings and revenue forecasts, and that the share prices would not fluctuate like those of a dotty dotcom.

Given these uncertain times, it is understandable for media conglomerates to be off-target in their estimates, but the issue for AOL Time Warner went beyond that–to the question of just how misleading the numbers were. Hence the fond interest of the Washington Post (perhaps jealous because it missed out on the chance to buy AOL) and the SEC.

The good news is that the normal checks and balances might be working–perhaps I’ll even risk a few hard-earned dollars because the price is so far down and I need to look ahead for retirement. Meanwhile, however, AOL has shafted me in two ways, first through its support for anti-Net copyright policies and second through its bookkeeping. I take it for granted that corporate executives are not monks. But AOL surpassed all expectations. And even now the scandals could be far from over. That $9.64 bargain could easily turn into a $5 one, regardless of the value of Time Warner assets. This greatly and deservedly hated conglomerate has been a wealth-drainer for the common investor, a piggybank for its top managers.

The TeleRead take: AOL is a splendid example of the desirability of a library-style distribution system that could better help creators and shareholders keep track of actual revenues. Independent auditors are not enough. The irony is that a library approach might actually build the value of the conglomerates’ stock–by allowing investors to get a better handle on revenues.

By

The stockmarket is a mess, senior citizens are threatened by high drug costs, terrorists may eventually nuke Washington, but our bought pols can still find time to do Hollywood’s bidding. Rep. Howard Berman, a property of AOL Time Warner and other stellar corporate citizens, Thursday introduced his bill to let content-providers use hacker-style tactics against file-sharing sites. The AP notes that Berman “represents part of Hollywood and is the House’s single largest recipient of political donations from the entertainment industry.” Also see a Wired News story telling how the bill would give special breaks to AOL Time Warner and similar conglomerate that used instant-message systems to allow file trading. At times like this even the most die-hard liberal–I’m one–wants to scream and become a libertarian in the face of the impending abuse of governmental power.

By

“The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit Tuesday challenging a controversial 1998 federal law that forbids the dissemination of information that could be used to bypass copy-protection schemes.” – AP, July 25, via the Nando Times.

The TeleRead take: The ACLU correctly argues that the law threatens freedom of speech among those researching protection technology.

By

“Using a search engine to locate stories on newspapers’ sites violates European Union law, according to a recent ruling by judges in Munich’s Upper Court.” – Wired News, July 25.

The TeleRead take: Let’s hope this contagion is wiped out before it reaches and affects the U.S. in a serious way. Once again, of course, the press is emerging is a major enemy of freedom of the press.

By

“Singers and entertainment attorneys criticized California’s $41 billion recording industry Tuesday, testifying that it routinely underreports royalties and cheats artists of millions of dollars.” – July 23 AP story out of Sacramento.

The TeleRead take: Well, so much for the recording industry as a defender of the creative. Old news, alas. The above item reinforces our comment made elsewhere that the best-lawyered tend to prevail over the most deserving. Meanwhile, in a related vein, let it be noted that the SEC is investigating bookkeeping at AOL Time Warner to see if the company has misrepresented itself to shareholders. Too bad we lack a Creative Exchange Commission to enforce the rights of individual creators dealing with huge conglomerates. On Wall Street, of course, the big buzzword these days is “transparency of earnings,” and a similar concept for the protection of creators wouldn’t exactly hurt.

At least with a TeleRead-style approach in place, it would be easier for creators to track revenue. Often, savvy agents for creative people might end up insisting that a TeleRead distribution system be used to discourage the very kind of chicanery to which the singers refer.

Who else would benefit from the additional openness? None other than the shareholders of AOL and the like.

By

Imagine “a world where everybody assumes they have the right to use intellectual property as they please, and the creator of the work has the burden of discovering that use of her property and billing for it….It can work because most of the infrastructure we need is already in place and paid for.” – Disenchanted, July 23, 2002.

The TeleRead take: Wonderful to see Disenchanted writing up the failings of the present copyright system, but the above proposal won’t fly. Just ask musicians, writers and artists who’ve been in extended copyright wars with large conglomerates. The real benefits will go in the end to those with the best legal teams. Inherently the idea might seem good. But, at least here in the States, that would be before our bought Congress went to work to favor the companies with the biggest legal budgets.

On the positive, the Disenchanted idea does have the advantage of allowing creators to take advantage of the infrastructures of those they try to bill. But for interested content providers, a well-stocked national digital library system could itself help supply the infrastructure–one that would work with the existing Web.

Under TeleRead, provisions would even be in place for file sharing, with a privacy-respecting system of tracking in place. Creators would be able to collect payments from users or from a national digital library fund, depending on whether the works were covered. Providers of content would participate voluntarily in the distribution and royalty systems. The fund, supported through a mix of public and private resources, would not be a panacea, but at least it would be a start and would inject new, badly needed sources of revenue into book publishing and other areas (though books would be the main focus).