TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home |
|
|
TeleRead calls for well-stocked national digital libraries in the U.S. and elsewhere. TeleRead's moderator is David Rothman (dr@teleread.org). For occasional highlights from this blog, join the TeleRead Mailing List.
Archives
RSS .91 - BloggerPro
|
Sunday, June 30, 2002
Words to remember next time Jack Valenti talks about copyright extension and creativity
"Ms. Lansing has never shown any interest in a greater corporate role. But the movie business is changing, and she may not want to change with it. 'Her career has been based on content,' Mr. Rudin said. 'Now it is more of a marketing business, and that may have less appeal for her.'" - New York Times, June 30 The TeleRead take: And don't think that book biz is any different from show biz. Time for more focus on a library model?
The case for bringing the books HOME "'When kids read during the summer, they do better in school,' said Carol Rasco, president and CEO of Reading Is Fundamental Inc. 'But just as importantly, summer reading should be fun and help kids discover that books can take them on great adventures.' It's in those moments looking through the library stacks, choosing a page-turning mystery or a sports biography -- with no test or book report looming beyond the final page--that kids learn the true entertainment value of a book." - Miami Herald, June 29, via Library Stuff The TeleRead take: But what about the rest of the year? Imagine the benefits if children could also browse around for the right book from home?
"P2P Streaming Radio" Pirate radio on the Net--which the RIAA can't trace? That's the claim discussed in Slashdot. The TeleRead take: Another example of the ingenuity of bootleggers--and the need for sustainable and user-friendly business models, whether for music or books.
A high-tech stage coach "Unfortunately, the bulk of resources in most libraries is still available only in conventional printed form: bound, numbered and arranged on shelves. You can try doing all your research electronically but at some point, you will have to hunt down a book on one of those shelves, sit down and thumb through its pages. In libraries of the future, researchers at Johns Hopkins University say, that kind of grunt work could be handled by robotic systems linked to the Internet." - New York Times, June 27 The TeleRead take: Mixed feelings here. This would be a great transitional technology and a long-lasting one to use for retrieving rare books, but let's not accustom ourself to limitations such as the one-reader-at-a-time approach. The true solution is a TeleRead-style digital one. Let's not content ourselves with even a high-tech stage coach.
Saturday, June 29, 2002
"Library Digitization Projects and Copyright"
Practical how-to guidance from Mary Minow, a library law consultant for LibraryLaw.com. Carried by LLX.com.
NPRwatch.org National Public Radio has leveled with us in offering one reason why it fears unfettered linking. Horror of horrors, what if people criticize NPR on their own sites and use too many NPR links? Why, they might even charge subscription fees. I myself am an NPR booster but relish the prospect of this nightmare unfolding. Gadflies are an essential part of media ecology, particularly when they're right. I was curious to see what NPR critics might actually be out there, right or wrong. The possibilities intrigued me. I already knew of media watchers such as ChronWatch. And earlier today I had run across PostWatch's reproduction of a piece called Post Op-Eds: Boring, Predictable Playground for the Center and the Right by none other than ex-Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy. Written originally for a pulped-wood version of the Progressive, the McCarthy article didn't include links to illustrate specifics. Still, given McCarthy's past prominence at the Post, the piece was bloody fun to read. More than ever, I hoped that bloggers and other Web publishers of all ideological stripes would prevail over Corporate Control Central. Inspired by PostWatch, which I found through a blog called Ombudsgod, I checked to see if there existed an nprwatch.blogspot.com. No dice. But over in the whois area of VeriSign, I did see NPRwatch.org, which at this point was offering nothing more than an "Under Construction" page. An email address listed in the whois, however, led to the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America--a very, very real site. From an NPR perspective, CAMERA turned out to be a show of horrors. I found that this site did not focus just on NPR--apparently that would be the job of the related NPRwatch, registered in 2000--but it was a potential linkfest for media skeptics. CAMERA was taking on Time, AP, MSNBC and CNN, not just NPR, and while I was immediately skeptical of some of the claims there (was the partly Jewish Geraldo Rivera really a "Palestinian-ist"?), this organization was entitled to have its say and use links to make its points. Within CAMERA, I discovered a host of anti-NPR items--for example: --June 26, 2002: NPR: Palestinians Who Murdered Israeli Mother and Children were "Commandos" (with a deep NPR link included) --May 3, 2002: CAMERA Calls on NPR to Fire Foreign Editor Loren Jenkins --January 2, 2002: NPR Distorts Even Its Bias --December 26, 2001: NPR's "On the Media" Distorts Interview with CAMERA --September 26, 2001: Despite Terror Attack, NPR Maintains Blacklist of Leading Terror Expert, Steve Emerson Quickly touring the above, I did not exactly see any intent to make people think that CAMERA was part of NPR, a risk that the Link Police in the past had mentioned without alluding to CAMERA. Just the opposite, of course. What's more, if anything, I had a link-related gripe of a kind that NPR might not have understood. I didn't see enough deep-linking to NPR to back up the points that CAMERA wanted to make. In CAMERA's place, for purposes of rebuttal if nothing else, I myself would have linked to a page where NPR's ombudsman discussed the Steve Emerson case and other accuations of bias. Had CAMERA wanted to link, in fact? Might NPR's old policy of ask-first have inhibited CAMERA? If so, the policy had backfired. Expect your critics to link to you to back up their points, and then they would have a harder time attacking--since the standards of proof would be higher. Whatever the facts, the CAMERA site has struck me as a textbook example of the need for NPR to do away explicitly with all restrictions on linking by advocacy groups, even implied restrictions. I don't care how many times NPR assures us that it won't use its linking policy to scare critics. Do we really want CAMERA and its future NPRwatch.org to rely on NPR's goodwill to do links? Even now, the revised NPR linking policy states: "We reserve the right to withdraw permission for any link." That's hardly a great example for a respected jouralistic organization, lest it have to depend too heavily on the kindness of strangers, who can throw the NPR precedent right back in the network's face. Requiring permission to link is truly an anti-journalistic mindset--a bit like filing a suit to do away with Times vs. Sullivan. Never mind the anti-link sentiments of certain greedy and clueless publishers. They are businessmen people, not working editors and reporters. By contrast, NPR "is pledged to abide scrupulously by the highest artistic, editorial, and journalistic standards and practices of broadcast programming." As it turned out, when I phoned CAMERA Executive Director Andrea Levin about the old and new link policies, she said that she herself didn't even know of the NPR linking controversy and had not received any letters from lawyers. Just the same, more than ever, I saw the legal risks here, especially since CAMERA told me that NPRwatch.org could indeed be the address of a real site in the future. Like most surfers on the Web, her staffers apparently weren't bothering to read the terms of service agreement--a good illustration of the risks that linking policies could pose to freedom of expression online. Asked about CAMERA's attitude toward NPR's linking policies, she referred me to her group's associate director--more informed about the Web than she is, I understand--from whom I'm still awaiting a call. Later this weekend I'm going to do what I should have done earlier. I'll write a nice polite letter to NPR and ask for a full list of sites with which the network's lawyers have corresponded about link matters. If I can see copies of the actual letters or email messages, then so much the better (never hurts at least to ask). I'm eager to find out more about the claimed "instances where companies and individuals constructed entire commercial Web ‘radio’ sites based on links to NPR and similar audio." Or about "advocacy groups that have positioned the audio link to an NPR story such that one cannot tell that NPR is not supporting their cause." In the first instance, the commercial sites, I wonder if NPR is simply talking about audio portals, and in the second, I wonder if trademark defense rather than link-based action would be the true solution. Meanwhile I would repeat my earlier recommendation against a boycott of public radio. No need for one; it isn't as if the network has stonewalled critics. The facts are on the side of us pesky link advocates, and I suspect that sooner or later NPR will come around. Via links, everyone gets zinged at times--in the free and open spirit of the World Wide Web. And here at the TeleBlog, we'd find it hard to envision the Web any other way.
Friday, June 28, 2002
NPR ombudsman's comments--and another friendly suggestion for the network
For the perspective of NPR's ombudsman, check out Jeffrey Dvorkin's page. He is open-minded enough to quote some of the network's critics, and he even includes a link to this TeleBlog. While I still dislike NPR's linking policies, I myself favor the gentle approach and would oppose the withholding of contributions to public radio stations. It isn't as if NPR is stonewalling us. A dialogue is still possible on such issues as linking by advocacy groups and businesses. What's more, as shown by a sympathetic segment that a Minnesota affiliate did with Cory Doctorow, a boycott would indirectly punish working-stiff interviewers and producers who are on our side or who at least are neutral. The network meanwhile has improved its terms of use--no more form to fill out before linking--and hopefully will be making other changes to address the serious and rather valid concerns of bloggers and other Web publishers. I see this as a matter of education. The more restrictions NPR imposes on links, the more risky it will be for the network's own Web operation to link to sites in the news. Perhaps NPR should contact lawyers at EFF and reporters' groups to check out different legal viewpoints from the one it is now getting. NPR holds itself up as an organization with strong journalistic values. That is exactly why the perspective of reporters' organizations might actually be more helpful than those from profit-minded publishers or broadcasters. A library-oriented lawyer might also help. If nothing else, NPR should keep in mind its mission statement--which in many ways overlaps with those of librarians, another group concerned with credibility. At the grassroots level, I know that Jenny the Shifted Librarian would have more than a few things to say.
Microsoft to pre-empt existing TCP/IP? We don't know and won't speculate. But author-columnist Robert X. Cringely is having some fun with the possibilities and even suggesting that Microsoft has deliberately left security holes in its products to stir up discontent with the existing Net. What we can say is that the telecom thieves completely justified Cringely's paranoia about them.
Time for NPR to cover the linking controversy Has NPR itself done a story on the linking controversy? Not that I know of so far. When I called the office of Nina Totenberg, the legal corresondent, I was told she didn't have time. But presumably NPR has other good, qualified reporters. The topic is important enough to be covered. If it isn't covered, then either (1) NPR will provide yet other evidence of cluelessness or (2) we'll know that NPR refuses to cover itself. Time for the NPR ombudsman to go into the air? Meanwhile, Jenny Levine, the Shifted Librarian, warns NPR not to "waste their own time and resources tracking links, sanctioning links, and paying lawyers to send threatening letters, all the while becoming the butt of an ever-growing web joke meme. You can bet that every story about linking ever will refer to NPR and that it will become the poster child for web cluelessness." Hello, hello, NPR? Librarians and teachers are normally among your biggest fans, and your linking polices are not making them very happy.
"Copy protection takes stealth approach" "Consumers may think they are successfully burning a CD protected by Smarte Solutions, but may discover otherwise when they try to play it... Privately held Smarte Solutions is working with software publishers to incorporate its SmarteCD technology into their wares. Unlike existing copy-protection schemes, which prevent CD burners from copying a disk, SmarteCD allows the user to burn a copy of the disc, explained company president Bala Vishwanath. The software can be installed from the bootleg disc and will appear to run normally, until the program reaches a point determined by the software publisher. Then the application will halt and present users with an invitation to purchase a legal, fully functional version of the software." - ZDnet, June 18, 2002 The TeleRead take: How long until e-book publishers cook up similar schemes, assuming they haven't already?
More on the FBI and libraries: The Saladin/Lolita factor So how helpful will circulation software be when G-men come to visit? LibraryPlanet.com gives one librarian's perspective. Interesting fact: Some forgetful patrons actually wanted their reading habits recorded over the long run so they'd know if they were reading the same book again. But at least one library software maker never enabled that feature, presumably with privacy concerns in mind. The TeleRead take: Yes, TeleRead could be designed with privacy protections. At same time I can also see the FBI's side on the need to track down cyberterrorists before they grow too smart about dams and air-traffic control routines. If the feds can go through due process and have specific people in mind--well, that would would be different from frivolous searches and routine monitoring of Americans' reading habits. As noted, too, terrorists actually did use one of my favorite library branches, Sherwood Regional, right there in Fairfax County, VA, perhaps to communicate with their fellow jihadists. Just the same, I'm delighted that librarians consider this a gut issue and are skeptical. Much of the crucial information isn't even in libraries but on the Net--including perhaps the dam and air-traffic information. What's more, everyone knows how leaky FBI files can be, and millions of Americans remember the old McCarthy-era abuses. As I hazily recall--it's been decades--an old family friend was even driven out of a midwestern town because the neighbors perceived her as too "liberal." Were the feds checking out Raphie Lou's reading habits? Never know what and who might offend. J. Edgar Hoover actually feared Albert Einstein as a subversive. So what happens if among us we have an Arab-American Einstein who is thoroughly loyal--to the U.S.--and just happens to have a passion for friendly biographies of Saladin? Someday will a Big Brotherish computer go through the circulation records of a public or university library and flag our friend as a security risk? If nothing else, the usual concerns arise about the use of sensitive information in, say, divorce cases, given the leakiness of files. Pity the beleaguered spouse who checks out Lolita at the wrong time.
"NPR Retreats, Link Stink Lingers" A good update on the NPR link controversy appears in Wired News with quotes from Cory Doctorow and me, two of the uppity linkers who believe that even NPR's revised policies threaten freedom of expression. Meanwhile a decision is expected July 5 in a deep-link-related case in Denmark.
"Save streaming audio on your PC!" ZDnet writer Preston Gralla offers links to several possibilities, but in my opinion, his best bet just might be Super MP3 Recorder, which "can save any audio stream coming into your sound card. It automatically chooses the best recording options, and then saves the stream as an MP3 or WAV file. This download records streaming audio in many formats, including Windows Media Player, QuickTime, RealPlayer, and Flash." The TeleRead take: This is the kind of technology that sends shivers down the spines of the RIAA members. I love it. RIAA and friends are working contain such magic, and I'm most grouchy. Um, we're in time shift territory--fair use and all that. Even content-providers, in fact especially content providers, can find uses for such tools. What if you're a financial radio show host and want your programs to go on the Web? No hypothetical situation. I designed a Web site for a financial advisor, and thanks to TotalRecorder, his radio station's Web audio could be saved and up at his own site within an hour or so of the original broadcast. In a book context, the implications are obvious. Whatever could be displayed on a screen could in theory be picked up. Oh, the fun of Draconian copyright law. Time for a more realistic library model?
Blowback time, Hollywood style: a preview Hours ago we noted that by turning the Net into a more and more of a cyberwar zone, a Hollywood-friendly proposal could alienate hackers and even jeopardize U.S. national security. All too helpfully, a BusinessWeek article from June 27 reinforces our point. See below. Even without Congress not (yet) falling for a wacky proposal from Rep. Howard Bermain to legalize cyberattacks against certain alleged copyright violators, it would appear that the risks are very real. Beware of blowback--a snake-cage-full of wanted consequences. Yaha Worm Takes Out Pakistan Government's Site; virus uses victim computers as denial-of-service agents, and tries to recruit Indian hackers into a cross-border cyber war The official Web site of the government of Pakistan is apparently the victim of a politically motivated attack launched by the latest version of an Internet worm. Virus experts said the Yaha.E worm, first identified on June 15, contains a payload designed in part to disrupt the home page of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with a rudimentary denial of service attack. Attempts to reach the site, located at www.pak.gov.pk, were unsuccessful Wednesday... Update: Whether because of the attack or for other reasons, we could not access the above site at 5:22 a.m. EST Friday.
"Archive to Hold History Of the Dot-Com Era" "Historians will be able to look back 200 years from now and read the original proposal for Boo.com or Kozmo.com or eToys.com and hear audio histories from executives and worker bees from the companies. Ideally, future students and business leaders will learn something from the mistakes that were made." - Shannon Henry, Washington Post, June 27. The TeleRead take: A much-needed project--from David Kirsch, an assistant professor of entrepreneurship at the University of Maryland's Robert H. Smith School of Business. No conflict with the valuable Internet Archive, which focuses on the preservation of actual Web pages. Perhaps by learning from the past debacles, we can avoid another @Home or--within the telecom area--WorldCom.
"No free lunch" department "Online magazine publisher Salon Media Group, Inc., faces the prospect of going out of business if it can't raise money this summer, according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission." - AP, via the New York Times, June 27. The TeleRead take: So even with the optional Salon Premier subscription plan, Salon isn't making it? This is a most unfortunate evidence to back up our mantra that good content costs. Salon can be infuriating at times--it did just a tabloid-style trashing of my book collaborator, Dean Tong--but despite its many flaws I'd miss it if it were gone. What about this free TeleBlog? Well, it and the rest of TeleRead are absolutely free of any corporate entanglements. But I'd love to be able to give it more time. I remain in search of a business model that would not compromise TeleRead's integrity. Feedback welcome on this and other matters. As best I can determine from stats from LFC Hosting, at least several thousand people a week are now reading the TeleBlog.
The word from Larose, Louisiana--and a lesson in the limits of blogging Nice letter received yesterday from a gungho library fan down in Larose, Louisana, who says a newspaper story to which I linked did not give the full picture. Check out my followup at the bottom of the original item on library-related gouges. Interesting lessons arise here on the limitations of blogging. Other TeleBlog contributors and I will try to link to good publications, but we can't police them in advance for accuracy, fairness or completeness. Especially when it comes to local stories, we're at the mercy of whatever the reporter chooses to write from the scene. Blogs are useful as information filters, but should never be considered a substitute for conventional media. Here at the TeleBlog, we link to a mix of both conventional and not-so-conventional sources but do our best to go for the most factual, whether they're newspapers or blogs or radio networks. This appreciation of credible news sources, as blog grist, is one reason why we've been pushing for NPR not to fetter itself or Webfolks with stupid linking policies. Bad news for the level of discourse. Carrying the concept further, you can see the advantage of enriching the Net with thousands of books online to which bloggers and other Web publishers can send use stable links to direct surfers. Not that TeleRead or a perfect NPR linking policy would have saved us from linking to the botched news story from Larose. But you get the idea. Meanwhile, speaking of the relationship between blogs and the conventional media, news consultant Steve Outing has just come out with a column suggesting that news organizations make blogs available to any reporter or photographer who wants one. Remember, blogs can carry pictures, too. Great idea, just so the blogs augment conventional news stories but do not replace them. As Steve points out, however, reporters do notebook dumps anyway and hoard surplus material, so why not make it public? An aside: It goes without saying that many of the TeleBlog links and maybe even most will not go to any news organization or even a quasi-news organization. Notice? Today I linked everywhere from Jack Valenti's official bio--no, I cannot and will not verify the veracity of the facts there--to the home page of the Larose Chamber of Commerce. That just happens to be the nature of the Web. No endorsement implied. I myself prefer to see source material, not just predigested information from news organizations, even if it may be flawed.
Thursday, June 27, 2002
Ugly Americans in cyberspace: Unwitting allies of al Qaeda
No, we won't question the patriotism of Jack Valenti at the Motional Picture Association of America. He's the Johnson aide who slept better during the Vietnam war because LBJ was in the White House. Just the same, Valenti and his friends like Hiliary Rosen of the RIAA might want to consider the damage to national security that they are doing with their unceasing war against hackers and the rest of the Net. Hackers and free-spirited sharers of files are the Viet Cong to people like Valenti and Rosen. Both depict themselves as upholders of civilization in cyberspace. And yet here's the RIAA smiling at a proposal that would allow copyright holders to mount attacks on illegal file-sharing sites--undoubtedly a 'tude shared by Valenti. What an efficient way for Americans and their copyright laws to lose respect on the Net and turn more hackers and others against us. Like it or not, the big-time copyright interests and their bought politicians are doing the work of America's enemies. Valenti and Rosen are the new Ugly Americans of cyberspace, the equivalent of the our political leaders who destroyed Vietnamese villages to "save" them. In fact, if lobbyists and obliging "public" officials keep trashing the Net, then even some secular hackers overseas may feel like joining forces with our al Qaeda enemies--as cybermercenaries. Lest you think these issues are academic, keep in mind that according to a story in today's Washington Post, al Qaeda's thugs would love to find hackers to use the Net to wreak havoc on the U.S. infrastructure. Dam gates might open to flood and kill thousands, and air traffic control systems might stop working. While Valenti and Rosen will correctly think that it's a long way from sabotaging P2P sites to letting jumbo jets smack into each other, this distinction may be lost on future recruits for al Qaeda and cybermercenaries who just might see this all as one big video game of a jihad. Here's a suggestion for Valenti and Rosen. Aren't many movies marketed these days according to the whims of focus groups? Maybe Valenti and Rosen need focus groups to identify the intellectual property models with which young people feel the most comfortable. A TeleRead-style national digital library approach, offering fair payment to content providers while staying as true as possible to the Carnegie model, just might win out. An aside: I myself hate the corruption of the word "hacker." It used to mean people who loved to explore the innards of computers, rather than stealing or destroying. Anti-kudoos to the big media for blurring the distinction between hackers and, say, "crackers."
Thanks, NPR--but your linking policy still has a way to go National Public Radio has dropped the controversial requirement that other people's Web sites ask permission before linking. Many thanks to NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin for speaking out on this issue even though I realize he isn't exactly in charge of NPR. While the new policy is a major improvement, I dislike NPR's prohibition against framing of its Web page. Not good. What's the problem as long as Joe or Jane Blogger does not misrepresent the source of the content? I also have difficulty with the rule that "the linking should not (a) suggest that NPR promotes or endorses any third party’s causes, ideas, Web sites, products or services, or (b) use NPR content for inappropriate commercial purposes. We reserve the right to withdraw permission for any link." Look, how many people are going to say, "NPR endorses the Association for Golden Retriever Killing"? That's a limited risk at most. On the Web, linking just does not imply endorsement unless there is explicit language saying so. Too, I'm a grouchy about "inappropriate commercial purposes." What's "inappropriate"? Even a fee-based site that charged money for a critical examination of NPR content should be allowed to make free use of links--in fact, especially a site like that. Analyzing NPR content is not the way to great riches. What's more, criticism is healthy. And if a fee makes the site more sustainable, then, reluctantly, given my preference for the free, I can tolerate that. At any rate, no pun intended, I like the idea of people having full freedom to make derivative works. That's what the Web is all about. Not so hypothetical, while we're in "commercial" territory, is a site run by Dean Tong, with whom I'm writing a book called Sex, Lies and Child Abuse. Dean makes his living putting together teams of lawyers for people wrongfully accused of abuse, just as he himself was. Now suppose NPR does a story that Dean likes. Will he be free to link to the text or audio without NPR considering this inappropriate because his services are so controversial? I myself like the idea of potential consumers for his services being able to get the facts instantly from NPR without Dean in the way. The same concept would apply to advocacy sites. In another problem with NPR, I notice that the network says, "We reserve the right to withdraw permission for any link." Any? Even if it doesn't mislead surfers? If backed by courts, this could open the way to reprisals by NPR against critics. While I can understand the usefulness of good linking policies in pre-empting bad ones--not everyone would agree, mind you--I'm don't think that even the new NPR policy is in the "good" category. Progress? Much. But no nirvana here. Furthermore, keep in mind efforts by governments to internationalize Net law and reduce geographical barriers. What happens in the future if the barriers aren't so formidable, and if NPR puts up a link that offends a government or business overseas. The network's Web side could suffer. Of course, the bottom line won't just be the policies but how they're enforced. I'm hoping that NPR will ignore the sillier parts of the policy revisions. Meanwhile stay turned for a news story tomorrow on one of my favorite Web sites, Wired News, which has energetically kept up with the important linking issue. I learned of NPR's latest policy when reporter Farhad Manjoo called for comment. Needless to say, I eagerly await the chance to link to Farhad's next Wired News story. How ironic that a private "commercial" news organization is far more open-minded about linking than is National Public Radio.
More on the Billington sell-out "As I've pointed out many times, protecting 'copyright owners' means protecting big business, not artists. That the Librarian of Congress views songs solely as property, discarding their status as culture, is even more appalling." - Dave Marsh, in a Counterpunch article, via librarian.net. The TeleRead take: Time for Marsh and others to call for Jim Billington's resignation? While the Webcasting case happens to have received big-time publicity, what about sell-outs where Billington is more quietly doing damage?
Wednesday, June 26, 2002
Library Stuff chosen Fox blog of the week
Congrats to Steve Cohen of Library Stuff. Uncongrats to the FBI library snoops for providing him with the grist for some of his items for the winning blog. Absolutely no sympathy for terrorists here--just a concern over loss of civil liberties if citizens' reading habits can be examined on whims.
An eBay for campaign donors? Why should pols and special interests waste valuable time when frictionless capitalism could come to their rescue? I propose an eBay that would let clashing interests bid for the votes of politicians. That way, Cisco, Intel and friends could compete openly and directly against anti-Net industries like movies or the big-time recording biz. Imagine the economies. Special interests wouldn't have to shell out big bucks on, say, Jack Valenti or oversized offices on K Street. We could do away with trade associations and campaign dinners. Just think how pleased H.L. Hunt's ghost would be. Luckily the above is satire. Not so happily, the item posted earlier this morning, about Rep. Berman, is reality.
Bought pol wants to legalize attacks against file-sharing sites "Copyright holders would receive carte blanche to use aggressive tactics to stop the illegal distribution of their works on online services like Morpheus and Kazaa under legislation outlined today by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.)." - Washington Post, June 25. The TeleRead take: "His bill would allow copyright holders to set up decoy files and use other techno-tricks like file-blocking and redirection to throw P2P pirates off the trail," the Post reports, "but it would forbid those holders from employing tactics that would damage or destroy pirates' own computer systems." The words "carte blanche" might be overdoing it, in fact. But the bill is strong stuff, just the same. Hollywood's is truly getting its money's worth from the Minority at-large whip in the House of Representatives. Even considering that Berman's district is next to Hollywood and Burbank, he's done a stellar job of sucking up to the entertainment establishment. Opensecrets.org lists $185,141 from show biz types through March 31, compared to a mere $95,100 from lawyers and law firms and $32,000 from real estate for the 2002 campaign. The $185K is a hefty percentage of the $863K total. Oh, to be a fly on the wall in Berman's office and hear conversations between him and lobbyists. For more cynicism, see Slashdot. What makes this situation even more fun is that Berman's committe assignments include both Judiciary and Standards of Official Conduct. Young hackers, why fear the law or reprimands from peers (and we don't mean just file sharers). When you're big and strong, you, too, can buy your own congressmen and bring down any Web site you want. Problems with the laws? Hey, just pay up to change 'em. Your congressional friends even oversee the FBI. Oh, and within the Judiciary committee, they can sit on the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, By company or other organization, Berman's top five sources of funds are Disney, $30,000 (how in character for The Mouse); AOL Time Warner, $28,050 (a fact for AOL to chew on next time its properties suffer hacker attacks); Vivendi International, $27,591 (maybe time to sell the entertainment properties and get back to the water business?); News Corp, $13,000 (one at least can admire Rupert Murdoch for his thrift compared to some of his rivals); and the American Federation of State, City and Municipal Employees, $10,000 (so much for certain unionists as consumerists). This money came from either employees, members or political action committees. Oh, and speaking of AFSCME, what's Local 2929, Council 36, have to say about Berman? Will 2929, representing LA Library employees, keep supporting this friend of affordable content? In fairness to 2929 members, perhaps they didn't entirely know what they were buying with the $10K.
Tuesday, June 25, 2002
The post-Billington Library of Congress
Who should replace Jim Billington as leader of the Library of Congress? And might it just be time to rethink the nature of the job? No endorsement of anyone right now, but Billington's serving as an unwanted in-house RIAA for librarydom is just one indication that he needs to step down. Feedback welcome on possible replacements. So much innovation is happening elsewhere, under Michigan librarian Christie Brandau and other library professionals; and the contrast with the 73-year-old Billington will only widen, as he stays in his own little time warp and technology moves on. I myself like the idea of changing the librarian's job so there is more emphasis on actual librarianship and technology and less emphasis on the head librarian as a czar of culture. Instead we could expand the roles of visiting scholars, artists, musicians and writers and others. Meanwhile the actual librarian could focus on the nuts and bolts of bringing the Carnegie model online. If the librarian were young and from outside the Beltway, so much the better--though I won't count on it. Perhaps good talent could be found among the grunts who have been doing the work for which Billington has taken ample credit. Just imagine what professional librarians and information scientists could accomplish without Billington around. However impressive is LOC's online collection, it is not a true library in the range of its holdings. Call me old-fashioned, but a "national digital library" without contemporary books is a little surrealistic. Thomas Jefferson would not be pleased. Jefferson "believed that self- government depended on the free, unhampered pursuit of truth by an informed and involved citizenry," and as one of the premier techies of his time, he would not have loved Billington's statement that e-books are anti-social. Chances are that Jefferson would be pressing for a decentralized, TeleRead-style approach to strengthen local libaries as opposed to building empires in Washington. Given all the library's present failings, Jefferson might also call for Congress to modify LOC's mission statement so the library was less a tool of Capitol Hilll and more a library for the entire country, especially in regard to putting books and other items on the Internet. Not to neglect our solons' needs. But they could be handled through an independent and expanded Congressional research service, apart from LOC, so that the library could focus on what should be its foremost mission, an informed citizenry in the Jeffersonian tradition. As for the copyright office, a library-oriented approach is best, and the office should not budge from the bosom of LOC, especially with Billington out of the picture. No more in-house RIAAs, hopefully. What an obnoxious Hamiltonian. One other lesson is that we badly need an official term limit for librarians of Congress. Billington is to the Library of Congress what J. Edgar Hoover was to the FBI--a pathetic relic who has outlived his usefulness but can still do plenty of damage. A brief LOC history by John Y. Cole, with a preface from you know which 'crat, says that there is no term specified for librarians "even though in the twentieth century the precedent seems to have been established that a Librarian of Congress is appointed for life." In effect librarians of Congress have often been like Supreme Court Justices. While lifelong appointments are right for a deliberative body in the vein of the Court--even then, cynics still joke about the justices and election returns--I question the needs for a similar situation at the Library of Congress. Long terms? Yes, of course. LOC needs independence. But, please, don't sentence the country to Billington-type dinos "for life." As a matter of fact, Billington's predecessor, the distinguished historian Daniel J. Boorstin wisely retired on 1987 as librarian after having served just short of 12 years. He was 72 at the time, a tad younger than Billington. Ironically, in an era of anthrax and dirty nukes, Billington could do real damage to our precious cultural heritage by not supervising the digitization of LOC as expertly as a younger, more tech-savvy person could--someone not just with the technical skills but the vision and the administrative savvy to see a well-stocked national digital library system become a reality.
Librarydom's in-house RIAA: Time for Jim Billington to go The decline of Web radio might have one positive--perhaps the start of an uproar against Jim Billington, the Librarian of Congress who kept the royalty fees high enough to kill off young stations. Time for this aging T-Rex to go after 15 years. Without doubt, Billington is among the planet's leading haters of tech. Here is a 73-year-old man who, in the interest of job protection, let more open-minded people at LOC put up a first-class Web site--and yet at the same time has spoken against having the library digitize books for the masses. He sees e-books as anti-social and says "you don't want to be one of those mindless futurists who sit in front of a lonely screen." What a dino. Professional librarians can be relieved that he is a political appointee, a historian-Kremlinogist, rather than a librarian from the start. Billington is thus free to embarrass us nonlibrarians. In today's Washington Post, Marc Fisher briefly tells how Billington bought the recording industry's arguments against a fair shake for Web radio. But that's just part of the story. Billington reeks of hypocrisy. "So far," he ranted in a speech in April 2000, "the Internet seems to be largely amplifying the worst features of television's preoccupation with sex and violence, semi-literate chatter, shortened attention spans, and near-total subservience to commercial marketing." And yet this noble soul cold-bloodedly killed off small Web radio stations that were playing alternatives to the standard violence and sex from the entertainment giants. "The amateurs who run Web stations haven't a prayer of making a living of it," Fisher wrote. "Theirs is a labor of love and dreams. Even the biggest Web operations, such as classical Beethoven.com, had only five figure revenue last year, but now face six-figure royalty fees." Thanks, Jim. Oh well, I suppose you can think of Beethoven the same way you thought of e-books during that revealing appearance at the National Press Club. "It is dangerous to promote the illusion that you can get anything you want by sitting in front of a computer screen."
Hollywood, hardware and HTML solutions for REB 1100 owners "If new PCs have copyright protection built into them, no one will want them and they'll just stick with the old ones. Which is exactly what might happen to those first Rocketbook readers. I remember lamenting how quickly the...RBs became outdated. Now I'm starting to think we might be able to sell them on eBay someday for a handsomely sum." - Jenny "Shifted Librarian" Levine, June 24. The TeleRead take: Among other things, Jenny is sensibly warning of the damage that Hollywood-inspired legislation could do to the PC industry--or, to be more exact, the users of the machines. What's more, in terms of the present, she dislikes another anti-user tool, proprietary formats, which Gemstar is trying to herd its customers toward, lest they contaminate holy products with converted HTML and get in the way of gouges for overpriced books. Are you yourself a Gemstar victim? Do you own the REB 1100, a newer version of the Rocket eBook, and do you want to read HTML files even if Gemstar would rather that you not--and in fact has even posted misleading information online to discourage you? Then go to Miscellaneous Stuff within the RocketBook/RCA eBook fan site for links to some handy conversion tools. Enjoy your HTML classics, or, for that matter, your own notes or works in progress. Savor your victory over the incorrigible urges of Gemstar boss Henry Yuen to turn you into a consumer rather than a doer. But, hey, enough of that. It's already payback time for him.
Monday, June 24, 2002
E-books: More than just for reference
E-books Investment Pays Off is the title of a generally upbeat piece in yesterday's Tampa Tribune. Still, keep in mind that this article is very set in the here and now. It is true that most of the library users are turning to e-books for references or for retrieving information from home at odd hours--as opposed to reading e-books hour after hour for pleasure. But it isn't as if e-ink or the equivalent is decades and decades away, or as if the Tablet PC and better screens won't give e-books a boost. Time to start planning now for the inevitable. Already, moreover, many young people are growing up in front of computers and very nicely accustomed to reading off them, even without wrinkles like e-ink. Big thanks to Library Stuff for spotting this item even I'm more optimistic than Steve is about e-books for reading hour after hour. Won't happen immediately in most cases. But it's on the way, especially among "well-screened" chldren. One area where Steve and I would agree is audio e-books in MP3 format. I can't wait for them to catch on in a big way beyond what's happening at Audible.
Time for NPR to rethink online biz model, not just link policies Wired News today discusses a Danish linking controversy and the continued fuss over National Public Radio's ask-first linking rule here in the states. Meanwhile let's look beyond law per se. NPR would advance its own mission of elevating public discourse if it came out solidly in favor of unrestricted linking. And that's not all. Pehaps it's time for NPR to think less about policies and more about business models. Of course, I'd rather see NPR offer a free, open and adless site. And if it can, then why should it worry so much about deep linking? Especially in this case, I won't buy the "context" argument that deep-link foes use even with free sites. Does NPR do its audio segments under the assumption that people will listen to the network all day? What's more, I doubt that links compromise its journalistic integrity. Almost always, surfers know what is NPR's and what is originated elsewhere. With the free, open and adless model especially, there is not justification for link restrictions. But let's say that NPR does need for the site to produce serious revenue, as opposed to being subsidized by donations or grants or little arrangements with the like of Audible for archiving downloadable material. One idea would be serve up ads for noncontributors to public radio--and adless pages for contributors. NPR could share subscription revenue with affiliates; contributors could even key in their zip codes. What's more, contributors who gave more than $100 or so might benefit from NPR-related products and services such as maybe an NPR-optimized news aggregator or a plug-in for an exisiting aggregator or browser. I know that Jenny has some interesting thought on libraries and aggregators, and she might want to share ideas here. Perhaps, like UserLand, NPR could even offer contributors some special news feeds in the .RSS format for customers--maybe even New York Times material and other goodies similar to what UL folks enjoy.
A starter TeleRead at the state level? Just about--in Michigan Check out a LibraryNotes item today. In this era of library budget cuts, Michigan's expanded ebrary collection is a shining example of technology as a resource-stretcher. It's almost a starter TeleRead at the state level even if it is not quite the same. At least if my hunch is right, between the lines, Michigan depending heavily on netLibrary for much more than just e-book-related software. TeleRead would use a very multi-vendor approach. Furthermore, hardware issues would be an integral part of TeleRead. The TeleRead take: Now imagine the efficiencies from a well-stocked national digital library system. And keep reading on. If you extrapolate from the Michigan figures, a TeleReaderish collection of books and other items might be possible at the national level for $100 million or so for annual online rights. For the sake of caution, let's assume that the $3.6 million mentioned in a newspaper column is not for purchase of perpetual rights. As for hardware issues, TeleRead calls for schools and libraries to lend out appropriate machines to encourage students to buy their own, and with delight I see that the Detorit Free Press reporting on a successful program in a Virgnia county to equip students with laptops. TeleRead could work on laptops, desk tops or tablet-style machines--ideally on tablets (with optional keyboards for email, word-processing and the rest). More from Michigan: Mike Wendland's June 24 column in the Detroit Free Press explains why the service is limited to state residents who provide "Michigan driver's license or state ID numbers... "Because, said state librarian Christie Brandau, the state had to pay $3.6 million to get the online rights to 1,600 popular business and health magazines, 10,000 nonfiction e-books and a wide assortment of databases, almanacs, card catalogs and research material previously only available in person in libraries across the state. "'To get permission to put all that material online, we had to assure the publishers that it would only go to Michigan residents,' said Brandau. 'This is the first time that this type of authentication has been tried anywhere in the country, but it now truly opens our libraries up for our citizens because they can now access us anytime they want from their home or office.' "The e-book feature is one of the most unique offerings with the new design. After finding a book you want to read, you check it out, just like in a regular library. You need to establish an account, a process that takes only a few seconds. The e-book is read through a special netLibrary Online Reader application and displays it in your Web browser. You don't have to download anything. "Like a regular library, the checkout is only for a limited time, though you can extend it with an e-mail. But unlike a regular library, if you don't return it in time, there's no fine. Instead, the e-book is removed from your individual display and 'returned' to the e-library." Further comments: TeleRead would let you download an e-book for your own hard drive or equivalent if you wanted, and you could keep it as long as you wanted. Problem with many systems--including perhaps Michigan's, though I don't know--is that there are limits on how many people can check out the same book at once. TeleRead could compensate suppliers of content according to actual accesses to the material, not just by the number of checkouts or other less sophisticated ways. Meantime, as long as we're discussing state-level library resources, keep in mind the differences between Michigan and Mississippi. Time for a national system in the TeleRead vein to address the "savage inequalities" among states? TeleRead could use a mix of public and private funding to assure maximum freedom of expression for content providers, who, of course, would also be free to distribute books and other items directly or through bookstores. Finally, let's do some quick math. Michigan's population is around 10 million out of a U.S. population of some 285 million--in other words around 1/29 of the national total. Multiply Michigan's $3.6 million by 29 and you come up with around $104 million. Even if you assume that's an annual figure--the $3.6 million is most likely not for perpetual online rights--that is a rather minor expenditure in the grand scheme of things in a $10-trillion economy. Add in more money to allow for infrastructure and the amounts are still small compared to the benefits. Needless to say, it would be interesting to hear about the cost details not only from Michigan but also from Indiana, Maryland, Connecticut and other states putting resources online for residents. This could be one way to get TeleRead off to a start and slowly expand from there to guard against bureaucratic bloat.
Budgets and the T word "...purchases of books and all other materials have come to a complete halt. Readers will soon notice that there are no new materials coming in, reference resources are not being updated and children’s books are not being replaced." - Web notice from the Asheville-Buncombe Library System. The TeleRead take: As you can see from LibraryPlanet.com, these unfortunate cuts are part of a national trend. Usual reminder: TeleRead could make book distribution more efficient and strengthen local libraries by giving them a wider range of titles to work with. Right now, by the way, just a fraction of library spending goes for content. TeleRead would mean not only more resources for content, but also for guidance and mentoring of schoolchildren and other users.
Internet cafes for the poor--and an idea for libraries "Internet cafes in South Africa are providing many with their first taste of the web and e-mail. " - BBC, June 24. The TeleRead take: Thanks to wireless and reduced costs, even the poor will eventually be able to get online from home. Meanwhile Net cafes are one solution. Speaking of which: Do any libraries have relationships with cafes? Computers are not substitutes for library branches, obviously, but are any libraries working out arrangements with cafes and other businesses in low-income neighborhoods? Might be a dirt-cheap way to help reach people in underlibraried areas. Beyond offering the Web, the systems could come up with library-oriented home pages, and allow people to order books from the cafes, with delivery via bookmobile.
"Lawyers in search of more business" department Will more books and movies really be preserved if copyright terms keep getting extended? That's what an American Bar Association document says in proposing formal support of the notorious Copyright Term Extension Act. Problem is, copyright-related industries like movies and book publishing have a miserable record at preserving films and the like. Besides, the issue isn't just the survival of physical or electronic copies. It's also keeping them on the minds of readers and viewers--best done by releasing works to the public domain in time, so they can be easily accessed from library archives or others, or used to inspire more recent creative efforts. No need for immediate release, of course. Copyright terms that don't stretch on forever, as, alas, they keep doing thanks to our bought politicians, will still inspire creativity. But enough is enough. 70 years past the life of an individual author? Come on. I myself have perped six books. I love my nieces and their future descendants, but even if I happen to win the lottery and do a best-seller, I'm not that keen on turning generation after generation of my family into what Michael Hart of Project Gutenberg has described as a "copyright gentry." Alas, the copyright holders are so fanatical these days that Disney has set its lawyers loose on a public library because a logo supposedly looks too much like the one showing Mickey Mouse. In a historical context, the gesture might be a little more meaningful if Hollywood hadn't allowed oodles of valuable old films to fade away. Horrifying thought: The wrong decision in Eldred vs. Ashcroft could eventually reduce the income of copyright lawyers. Thanks to Jenny Levine for this one.
Sunday, June 23, 2002
Content and wireless access
Two other finds via Jonathan Schull's blog: --Making The Web Relevant for Underserved Americans: What They Look For, a .pdf file from the Children's Partnership. Needed, among other things? More local job-related information and sites for people with limited reading or English skills. Needless to say, a TeleRead-style approach could help since commercial objectives are not always the same as societal ones. --The Community Technology Center's interesting Wireless Project. The proposal calls for Wi-Fi for three housing projects. Great way to reduce wiring costs. Excellent idea. Bring the Net home.
Gouge-proofing our libraries "A rent hike has prompted officials to consider moving a library branch out of the Larose Civic Center. Acting Library Director Paul Chiquet said the rent for the library has increased from $650 per month to $1,600. 'That is a big jump,' Chiquet said, 'and the Larose branch is our smallest branch.'" - The Houma (LA) Courier, June 23. The TeleRead take: The story goes on to discuss the possiblity of gouges at other branch libraries in the area. Pathetic, no? If this is like many other rural systems, then every penny counts. Keep in mind that with brick-and-mortar libraries, only a fraction of money can go for books. TeleRead would not replace neighborhood libraries but would make them less vulnerable to such gouges since over the years a higher and higher percentage of the collections would be electronic--thus making it easier to relocate branches. What's more, with a national, integrated approach, librarians would enjoy more bargaining power with vendors of all kinds. Followup, June 27: You never know who's reading this TeleBlog. Straight from Larose, Louisiana, comes a reply to the original news story, which apparently left out some key facts. "The article you've excerpted contains factual errors--the rent increase cited by the Library Director is incorrect. The landlord, a nonprofit community center, has rented 3,000 square feet of space for the bargain-basement rate of $625/mo, which includes utilities, pest control, bathroom janitorial services, security, and maintenance. The community center/landlord requested that the library pay a monthly rent of $900, and begin paying its own utilities. "Keep in mind, this library system has approximately $6 million in the bank. We're talking about the first rent increase in fifteen years, which will not go to a private landlord, but to a volunteer-supported community center. "I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of bringing additional electronic resources to the public. Your blog is great, but quoting snippets of published articles without a full understanding of circumstances doesn't help anyone's cause. Keep on blogging, but you might want to investigate your stories a little closer. "Thanks for the opportunity for feedback "A devoted public library user." The writer, whom I won't name because of her job, later added a few more details via corresondence, including the following: "The library has been a tenant in the community center since its construction--it's an 'anchor' within the complex. The library system does indeed have a huge surplus--several years ago, the citizenry voted in a millage increase for the library, and services haven't expanded in proportion to the funds collected. Currently, the library board of control is not legally constituted due to actions by the Lafourche Parish Council, which 'fired' the previous board (the previous board had the audacity to fire a director guilty of fiscal mismanagement). Thus, the sitting board doesn't have the authority to negotiate with the community center, so the whole issue is up in the air until the board's legality can be resolved."
Saturday, June 22, 2002
The high-tech "know" of "who you know"--and the TeleRead take
Speaking of Jon Schull's blog--see the previous TeleBlog post--he has a link to an interesting paper called Inside the Digital Divide: Connecting Youth to Opportunities in the New Economy. The paper from Bob Pearlman, former president of the Autodesk Foundation, cites an A.T. Kearney study to back up a statement that a "student's social network can have a significant impact on his/her career choice. Students whose parents are both in high-tech careers are more likely to be interested in technology careers themselves. In addition, 83 percent of students rely on personal connections for career-related information and guidance." "Networking is white people's affirmative action," the paper quotes one graduate of a regional desegration program in Boston. "So how do you enhance social networks for all students, particularly those from disadvantaged communities?" the paper asks. "Obviously you are not going to change a student's parents or relatives or community, but you can give them schools, and programs, that link them to caring adults in the new economy." The TeleRead take: All true. In fact, a subhead in the Pearlman paper says: "Education + Skills (Hard + Soft) + Social Networks => Student Success." What can help, of course, is the easy availability of books and other items so children from low-income households--whatever the race--can keep up with other students. Under TeleRead, rich and poor alike could easily share items covered by a national digital library fund, with accesses tracked to assure proper compensation for publishers and writers. Remember, not every book is a textbook. Bright childen may do some of their best learning from items passed on to them by friends. TeleRead would make this happen far more easily than otherwise, so that even within networks of "disadvantaged" children, books could be shared. What's more, the children could all be reading the same e-book at once--on their own machines. Compare that to the artificial scarcities created by systems that limit the number of children checking out a book. Needless to say, by increasing the range of library items available, TeleRead would also make it far, far easier for "caring adults in the new economy" to mentor children both in person and from afar.
"I don't understand the vituperativeness of the NPR controversy" "NPR will learn, now what about the critics? I don't really understand the vituperativeness of the NPR controversy. Public Broadcasting (NPR, PBS) in America is a national treasure--quality, taste, and humor and an important working business model for an indispensable information service that is free, open and publicly funded. We would all be well-advised to help Public Broadcasting learn to feel, and be, at home in what will soon be their new medium." - Jon Schull in his Weblog today. The TeleRead take: A firm but gentle approach is called for. In my opinion NPR's folks aren't lying; different interpretations of link-related laws are possible. Still, the network will harm the evolution and spirit of the Web if it continues to have an ask-first policy on linking or keeps other onerous restrictions in place. Methinks NPR should adjust to the Web rather than the other way around. That way, even NPR, in fact especially NPR, will come out ahead. Enforcement of restrictive linking policies would reduce site traffic and interfere with NPR's mission of promoting a well-informed citizenry. Let's look beyond NPR, too. The TeleRead proposal, for example, suggests a mix of private and public funding for a national digital library system, and we advocates would rather that TeleRead not contain ask-first linking restrictions. Let's hope that the present NPR policy vanishes fast so we don't have the wrong precedent (please note that the federal government directly contributes only a tiny fraction of NPR's money). Meanwhile, Jenny "Shifted Librarian" Levine thoughtfully observes: "David makes an interesting suggestion that NPR start using blogs, which are built primarily on links, in order to better understand links (although I think individual blogs, rather than a top-level NPR blog, is a better idea). However, an organization that is this scared of incoming links is going to be even more terrified of outgoing links. Until they understand the fundamental principles of linking, NPR will never blog." Jenny makes some excellent points, but as I see it, NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin could start in a low-key way and if need be do links only to safe destinations such as pages elsewhere within the NPR site and those of NPR's business partners. Them, as he grew more confident, he could progress beyond the obvious choices like Yahoo. Sooner or later he would understand how link-related inhibitions could harm the quality and especially the clarity of Web-based writing, not to mention the range and accessibility of the content itself. He's no dummy and, within the limitations of a busy schedule, could make a great blogger. Finally--a pointer to an earlier item so people can read a followup. Dan Gillmor has clarified an earlier comment and said he is not avoiding NPR interviewers. Rather, at least for the moment, they seem to have tired of either tech or him. Time for NPR to put him and Cory Doctorow on the air in a link-rated segment--along with Jeffrey Dvorkin and like-minded people? Of course ideally the NPR folks by then will better understand the benefits of linking and be much closer to his side and Cory's than they are now.
"Getting Touchy-Feely With Tablet PCs" "Yahoo News [is] currently running a story, Tablet PCs gaining momentum, describing a renewed enthusiam among computer manufacturers for Tablet PCs, in the face of skeptics who are, apparently, abounding. The skeptics insist, between bounds, that Joe Public just won't pay the extra $150 that touch screens add. Having spent much time lusting over Wacom's $3,500 Cintiq 18sx, a combined graphics tablet / 18" LCD screen and one of the few pieces of hardware that I would consider starting a family with, I beg to differ." - Post on Slashdot. The TeleRead take: Years ago in an earlier, much-revised incarnation of TeleRead published in Computerworld, I talked up multipurpose tablet-style machines and called them TeleReaders. It's great to see the marketplace on its own coming up with similar and even more advanced creations, though the TeleReader concept could still help by increasing the demand and driving down prices. Under TeleRead, libraries and schools could receive guidance and funding for buying machines to lend out to users, as, in fact, is already happening at some libraries--just as, years ago, I hoped it would. Having gained familiarity with borrowed machines, users could go on to buy their own. Like Microsoft e-book director Steve Stone, I believe that within the next five or ten years, the right hardware could go for well under $100 and maybe even $50 or less. This interest in hardware is part of TeleRead's integrated approach. What good is the best national digital library system in the world if only members of the tech elite have access to the right machines?
The glories of e-paper as an LCD replacement "Imagine your laptop PC and its keyboard changed into a sheaf of flexible e-paper that wirelessly receives full editions of periodicals (in Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Reader formats with screenmapped hyperlinking); that can display a touch-sensitive keyboard; that you simply roll up around its tiny battery/CPU/receiver cylinder and slip into your pocket or purse when done; and that lasts several weeks on a charge." - Vin Crosbie in E-Media Tidbits. The TeleRead take: Significantly, too, e-ink will be just as readable as ink on pulped wood. Policymakers more than ever should look ahead to the era of digital libraries--given the constant improvements in the related technologies. A recent GAO report, though dealing with preservation of government doucments rather than e-books per se, is certainly of interest.
Memo to Dan Gillmor and NPR Followup: See our June 29 update on NPRwatch.org. DAN GILLMOR: In your lively blog for the San Jose Mercury News, you wrote: "I have appeared on NPR quite a few times in the past. I doubt I'll be appearing there much in the future." You might rethink that. The people who set the NPR linking policy are not the grunts who produce and report the programs. If you're for unfettered linking, you might as well be for unfettered interviewing. JEFFREY DVORKIN, NPR OMBUDSMAN: While Dan G would be wrong to cut back on NPR interviews, his comments typify the reaction your network is stirring up among the clueful--vexation that will continue as long as you're not open to linking by "left-handed socialist diabetics." And notice? Dan uses a blog to help stay in touch with the needs and interests of his readers. Not every NPR listener is on the Internet, and only a fraction keep blogs or otherwise publish on the Web, but I suspect that millions of NPR listeners keep up with small Web sites and heartily dislike your network's attempts to restrict linking, regardless of the ideologies involved. Why not do a Gillmor and use a blog to keep up with the pulse of the Internet so you and NPR can avoid similar mistakes in the future? Here's a way to add some Net context to your impressive experience in other areas. I'm just across the Potomac River from you and would be delighted to drop by and offer some free advice on a Dvorkin-NPR blog, though your in-house Web folks could probably accommodate you just as well or better. Blogger and Radio are merely two of the blog products you might consider. Via your blog, you could effortlessly link not just to NPR programs referenced there but also to listeners' contributions to your discussion boards. Followup: Dan Gillmor clarified his statement that "I have appeared on NPR quite a few times in the past. I doubt I'll be appearing there much in the future." Looks as if NPR, not Gillmor, is why you shouldn't expect him on there soon. He wrote me on June 22 that "They've tired of technology [or him], and haven't had me on in months--and I don't expect any change." Hmm. Exactly the problem, assuming that tech boredom is the reason. If I were NPR, I'd have Gillmor on pronto to explain why no-fuss links matter. Linking and other Net-related issues aren't going away. The Internet is important just like the foreign news so dear to NPR, and at times the two categories may even converge. I'm surprised and disappointed that NPR would stop using a first-rate, well-tested expert like Gillmor.
"It's not a book culture. It's a movie culture. It's a TV culture..." "I tell people all the time I'm a famous writer in a country where people don't read. It's not a book culture. It's a movie culture. It's a TV culture. It's a sports culture." - Best-selling writer John Grisham in an interview with Katie Couric, as quoted by AP. The TeleRead take: Exactly. A well-stocked national digital library system would hardly turn every American into a book-crazed soul, but it would help. Ditto in other countries. Point is, books work out best when offered in context, and ideally with the recommendation of a friend. Via TeleRead, people could easily link to books from their Web sites or e-mail messages--or maybe eventually the two-way videos they exchanged. Keep in mind, too, that with books in digital format, it would be a snap to create audio books via speech synthesis. So people could jog or garden while they listened on MP3 players. As an editor quoted in the AP story points out, people have less and less time for reading, and via audio books and otherwise, TeleRead could help change this.
Friday, June 21, 2002
Nice try, NPR--but please change the policy ASAP
In an update of a legal page, National Public Radio today said its controversial ask-first linking policy "was originally intended to maintain NPR’s commitment to independent, noncommercial journalism. We have encountered instances where companies and individuals constructed entire commercial Web 'radio' sites based on links to NPR and similar audio. We have also encountered Web sites of issue advocacy groups that have positioned the audio link to an NPR story such that one cannot tell that NPR is not supporting their cause. This is not acceptable to NPR as an organization dedicated to the highest journalistic ethics, both in fact and appearance." The TeleRead take: The statement goes on to acknowledge that the "majority of the linking on the Web is not infringement." Exactly! Why should the whole Net suffer for the transgressions of a few? Via technology, it would be possible either to lock out abusers or at least track them and then obtain the information for lawyers. I would suggest that NPR be careful, however. Just because an advocacy site says a story comes from NPR doesn't mean the site is saying NPR supports the cause. Hopefully a revised policy can acknowledge that truth. There are also issues as to how much of a site should rely on links to NPR. What if the site is devoted to critiques of NPR stories? Meanwhile, at least until the policy revision, the NPR legal page still contains the unfortunate words: "Linking to or framing of any material on this site without the prior written consent of NPR is prohibited. If you would like to link to NPR from your Web site, please fill out the link permission request form." Sorry, no can do. Followup: Nor, obviously, can EFF's Cory Doctorow. Clarification: Actually I would agree with Cory that links can't infringe; URLs are public facts pointing to documents' locations. Besides, as every true expert from Tim Berners-Lee on would say, the Web was designed for unrestricted links. My thinking, however, as a nonattorney, is that through framing or otherwise, there could still be attempts to mislead surfers in one way or another, perhaps raising trademark issues, for example. But, in my opinion, that is a different question from linking as such. What's more, as noted, such cases would be the exception and are no reason for the average Webmaster or blogger to suffer.
"Reverse Psychology at NPR" "'...Seriously, what's wrong with their brains? Everyone knows that the key to getting site hits is links, the more the merrier. Ask any blogger The ironic thing is that NPR's hits have surged because bloggers are now punishing it by flagrantly violating its policy and linking. Could this have been NPR's plan all along? Maybe I should post my own 'no linkage without permission' notice so I can be punished too." - Madeleine Begun Kane as quoted by Jenny "Shifted Librarian" Levine. The TeleRead take--further thoughts: Maybe Jeffrey Dvorkin, NPR's ombudsman, should try blogging just for a month to see what it's like to handle links. Best way yet to appreciate the many-to-many model. Along the way, a bloggish approach just might increase the readership of his page. He could still write long, reflective items but keep them more timely--and with more specifics available to the reader, given the powers of linking. No need to imitate Jim Romenesko's MediaNews, but some lessons can be found there.
NPR ombudman: Link policy will be "more reflective" of net.realities Just received from NPR Ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin: "NPR has received emails from many interested observers commenting on its linking policy. For the most part the emails have been useful and enlightening. Occasionally polite. "NPR will be reviewing its policy about linking. NPR understands that with the rapid changes in information technology and the culture of the Web, its policy should be more reflective of the Internet realities to permit a freer flow of information." One way for the policy to be more reflective, of course, is for NPR not to worry about the "integrity" of its pages being compromised by those pesky left-handed diabetic socialists. If NPR can avoid imposing tricky conditions on linking, that will go a long way toward ending the problem. It is acceptable to forbid links that make people think that the diabetic socialists are part of NPR, but at least don't get into the business of automaticallly excluding certain controversial groups. Meanwhile thanks to NPR for the progress so far. May more be ahead. For more on this issue, check out some thoughts from Cory Doctorow of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Business and government vs. the Net Vint Cerf and other net.luminaries are correctly worried about pushy and greedy corporations bogging down the evolution of the Net--by, for example, setting up fee structures that discourage the growth of two-way broadband. They also see government as a risk. The TeleRead take: What a timely article. NPR, not governmental but close to it, should pay close attention as it rethinks its link policy. A strong Net without micromanagement from The Powers that Be would mean more democracy, better government and higher corporate profits. NPR's present linking policy is a threat to democratic discussion. And innovative entertainment companies could be hurt by Net-related consumer gouges from cable and phone companies--shrinking the market for new forms of creativity. Even post-terrorism recovery could suffer in the future, given the growing importance of telecommuting and remote work and the increasing usefulness of broadband for applications such as teleconferencing.
Why I don't own a Gemstar-style e-book reader VHS has been around for two decades. And yet Circut City is dropping it for DVD. The TeleRead take: This, of course, is why I'll never buy an e-book reader in the Gemstar vein. And why libraries, too, should try to avoid them nowadays. Of course, a TeleRead-type digital library system could address format issues far more successfully than individual library systems could on their own.
Thursday, June 20, 2002
Web radio decision: Far from perfect for small-fry
"Federal copyright regulators on Thursday set new royalty rates for online radio companies, halving previously proposed fees that had drawn bitter criticism from Net companies. Under the new rates, Web companies would pay 0.07 cent, or about a fourteenth of a cent, every time they played a song online for a single listener. Radio stations would pay the same amount when they put their music programming online." - Cnet, June 20. The TeleRead take: A disappointment--even with lower fees than some had expected. Many small Web-broadcasters could still go out of business. Oh, well, Jim Billington is hardly the biggest friend of the Net or at least of e-books. The Library of Congress Web site is slick but hardly a substitute for a well-stocked national digital library system. Followup: More details from New York Times.
NPR Update: Some progress Jeffrey Dvorkin, National Public Radio ombudsman, tells me that the network most likely will loosen the Web-link rules requiring permission. A final decision, following a meeting earlier today, could come in days or weeks. He asks that protest letters stop as he's quite swamped. Meanwhile the issue of who can link, without a hassle, is apparently still alive, even now. Earlier, in an interview with Wired News, the ombudsman registered concern about links from even some noncommercial sites: "It depends on your homepage--what if you're an advocate for left-handed socialist diabetics? We wouldn't want to give support to advocacy groups." Whoa! Maybe NPR should reconsider. Fascinatingly, Mr. Dvorkin is on the cusp of going from the hypothetical to the real. My wife isn't left-handed or socialist but is liberal and diabetic. Besides, among groups, doesn't NPR want to contribute to informed debate? Being linked to isn't the same as NPR's endorsing any viewpoint. Too, even commercial sites should be able to link freely to NPR. If you were shopping for a lawyer or automobile and a site said an NPR story was useful in evaluating a service or product, wouldn't you want to see the story itself--not just a biased paraphrase? Easy linking would help you, not hurt you, as a consumer. Simply put, unless some site is passing itself off as part of NPR or is guilty of something else equally outrageous, the network should not police links. For more details on the controversy, see the latest Wired News article--Want to Read This? Ask First, from Jon Rochmis. The TeleRead take: Just another reminder: Easy linking without bureaucracy involved is one of the core concepts of TeleRead. Any national digital library worth its salt should have stable links without interference from The Link Police. Furthermore, the library should enjoy long-range funding from public sources and also support from private ones. And independent distribution systems for books should be available in meatspace and on the Net. TeleRead assumes that government censorship will occur--hence this interest in bypass mechanisms for Big Brotherish occasions. While NPR is not a government agency, it certainly functions in many ways as a quasi-governmental one, and the present link policy ill-serves the cause of public enlightenment.
NPR rethinking the deep link rule -- Speak up if need be A Wired News story by Farhad Manjoo chronicles the growing resentment against National Public Radio's linking policy, which requires permission for deep links. NPR Ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin has just told me that the legal, news and Web sides will reconsider the policy this afternoon--he himself will participate. I'll think good thoughts. During our conversation, he asked some open-minded questions about the nature of deep linking, and I promised to use this blog to point him to background on the topic, including a Christian Science Monitor article on a Scottish linking feud between two newspapers. Meanwhile people might want to hold off on the protest until they learn how the public radio decision goes. You can use NPR's home page to stay updated. If NPR does not reverse the policy, you may want to contact the corporate sponsors and philanthropies that fund NPR. Would this crimp NPR's freedom of expression? Hardly. In fact, that's the problem--NPR is crimping ours. Look, this is supposed to be public radio. And it's long been accepted that links do not imply endorsement, just so they're not misleading. That's the standard etiquette on the Web. Furthermore, the permission-first requirement will backfire against NPR if this continues. What if like-minded corporate Webmasters start actually taking such nonsense seriously and lawyers sue NPR for letting its Web site do deep links? So much for the freedom of linking by NPR's online journalists. If nothing else, actual enforcement of the permission-first requirement would reduce traffic to NPR's own site--assuming, of course, that Netfolks by the thousands didn't defy the lawyers for the sheer joy of it. Thought: Nina Totenberg should cover this controversy if it continues and maybe even if it stops. Just what will NRP's legal maven on the news side have to say? As best I can determine, the NPR does not publish her email address, but perhaps you can politely write her care of All Things Considered at atc@npr.org. If I were Ms. Totenberg, this would be one of the times I spoke up, if need be off the air. Freedom to link is a core journalistic issue. She herself was a 1992 recipient of the James Madison award from the ALA--given to "those who have championed, protected and promoted public access to government information and the public's right to know." You can also write Jeffrey Dvorkin himself if the decision does not go the right way. No flaming, please. Again, at this point, it would seem he is open minded. Note: I will be away from my office and will not be able to make updates immediately.
The Deep Throat e-book--and the copy-protection issue Are you a librarian? Wanna circulate John Dean's new e-book from Salon? Good luck. Jenny "Shifted Librarian" Levine writes insightfully of copy-protection issues and other potential problems associated with Unmasking Deep Throat. Among other things, she mentions the $5,000 price of Adobe's serverware, which offers protection. One of her readers suggests a sneaker.net approach and signing the Dean e-book in and out. But as we see it, that is hardly a solution when libraries offer material remotely. What's more, Jenny is also rightly concerned that Rocketbooks and Franklin eBookmans can't read .pdf files like the one used for the newest Deep Throat speculation. The TeleRead take: Obvious. Copy-protection, rights-management issues and format ones are among the basics that a TeleRead-style library system could address to ease the burden on local libraries.
"The Wayback Machine, Friend or Foe?" "As a Webmaster of numerous sites, I'm curious how others feel about the Wayback Machine. What particularly interests me is the fact that the Machine is a relatively new animal, yet it contains snapshots from my sites dating back to 1998. I can't help but wonder: where did they get such old copies of my websites, and who gave them permission to make those copies?" - A message to Slashdot. The TeleRead take: As defenders of the Wayback Machine have pointed out, it's easy to keep your site out of the Machine--by tweaking a standard robots.txt file. TeleRead could use similar techniques.
"Librarians want more pay, and they're learning to ask for it" - Newspaper headline  "We must overcome the stereotype of the librarian as the selfless, dedicated and devoted worker, who is in the profession to do good and will accept any pittance of pay." - Maurice Freedman, new president of the American Library Association, as quoted by an Associated Press account in the Savannah Morning News.The TeleRead take: A TeleRead approach could help the cause. With more material online, public librarians could spend more time acting as high-level guides, Web editors and the like--and less time on menial tasks such as checking paper books in and out. Librarians would be more productive. And such arguments could be used to lobby for more pay. With TeleRead, the public could better understand the issue of financial comparability with information-related jobs in the private sector.
"Blogspace vs. NPR" "Linking to or framing of any material on this site without the prior written consent of NPR is prohibited. If you would like to link to NPR from your Web site, please fill out the link permission request form." - NPR's legalese. The TeleRead take: A TeleRead-style national digital library system wouldn't end stupidities like NPR's. But at least TeleRead would help. After all, it could include a ric |
