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.
posted by David Rothman at 5:09 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 4:53 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 3:51 AM | permanent link

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.
posted by David Rothman at 6:03 AM | permanent link

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.
posted by David Rothman at 11:24 PM | permanent link

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.

posted by David Rothman at 11:08 PM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 3:48 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 1:57 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 2:39 AM | permanent link

"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."


posted by David Rothman at 1:37 AM | permanent link

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.)
posted by David Rothman at 2:38 PM | permanent link

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.
posted by David Rothman at 6:21 AM | permanent link

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.
posted by David Rothman at 5:36 AM | permanent link

"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.

posted by David Rothman at 5:28 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 6:05 AM | permanent link

"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.
posted by David Rothman at 4:58 AM | permanent link

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).
posted by David Rothman at 4:26 AM | permanent link

See a recent San Jose Mercury News article (via LibraryPlanet).

posted by David Rothman at 3:17 PM | permanent link

E-books are hardly taking the world by storm, but the picture just isn't as gloomy as the doomsters claim. From a press release from the Open eBook Forum:

--Random House, Inc.'s eBook revenues doubled year-over-year in 2001 and during the latest quarter ending in March, revenues were the highest since the company began selling eBooks in 1998.

--HarperCollins' eBook imprint, PerfectBound, has sold more eBooks in the first five months of 2002 than in all of 2001.

--Average monthly downloads of Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader have increased by approximately 70% from 2001 to 2002.

--Simon & Schuster has seen double-digit growth in eBook sales from the first half of 2001 to the first half of 2002.

--Over 5 million copies of Microsoft Reader have been distributed for use on desktop, notebook and Pocket PC systems.

--Palm Digital Media reports that nearly 180,000 eBooks were sold in 2001, a more than 40% increase from 2000.

--In 2002, McGraw-Hill Professional eBook sales are up 55% over the same period last year.

The TeleRead take: And remember, these numbers don't include the many thousands of free e-books downloaded each week from groups such as Project Gutenberg.
posted by David Rothman at 2:49 PM | permanent link

"It is not so important that principals master the latest toys and gadgets--rather that they show an appreciation for the challenges facing teachers and that they become knowledgeable about the best ways to use these tools to improve reading, reasoning, writing and communication." - Leading by Example: The High Touch High Tech Principal, by Jamie McKenzie in the Summer 2002 issue of From Now on--published originally in the Classroom Connect Newsletter.

The TeleRead take: Exactly! Not so coincidentally, a principal was solidly behind a successful e-book project described in TeleRead Update 19.
posted by David Rothman at 10:11 PM | permanent link

Good article in the Washington Post today on the decline of rural America and the need for more sensible polices to encourage rural development. How to keep 'em down on the farm? With better telecommunications, in part--to help create more jobs. But that still does not address the content question. Imagine how a well-stocked national digitial library system could help narrow the gap between rural and urban libraries and their users. Attention, Senator Dorgan. The TeleRead approach certainly should be in your territory in more than one sense of the word.
posted by David Rothman at 9:58 PM | permanent link

I'd never have confused Robert Pittman, AOL's departing COO, with John Perry Barlow. Pittman was and is a bottom-line guy just like Steve Case. Still, his departure from AOL is one more sign that the old Time Warner people are in control, and that has implications in the copyright war. It puts AOL more solidly than ever on the side of the big copyright holders at the expense of the online side (and in many cases the public). Of course Pittmann himself was a good example of the confusion at AOL. He actually came up with the malarkey that the country wasn't sufficiently ready for broadband--the very stuff that AOL should have been promoting by providing the right content, both new and from its well-stocked vaults.

Meanwhile I couldn't agree more with those who challenged the logic of Pittman and colleagues and doubted that AOL could collect as much as $159 a month from broadband subscribers for movies and other add-ons. It's surrealistic. What would help would be reasonable prices. Users are willing to pay only so much for services beyond the basics, even the broadband basics. This is one illustration of the advantages of the library model. It would not single-handedly solve the problem of getting users to pay for content, but certainly would help through improved efficiencies and greater diversity.
posted by David Rothman at 6:33 AM | permanent link

TeleRead is an all-volunteer effort. That's good for the integrity of the cause, but can mean that postings will not be as frequent when life and business get in the way. I myself am fighting a mean deadline and coping with my wife's health problems. If you want to know when a daily schedule resumes, drop us an email and we'll put you on the light-volume TeleRead mailing list. Meanwhile, thanks to Amos Bokros, Raymundo Pedraza and other contributors. Guest essays are welcome, especially those that use news events to show the need for well-stocked national digital library systems in the States and elsewhere. See the TeleRead FAQ - David Rothman, dr@teleread.org
posted by David Rothman at 6:11 AM | permanent link

"Computer graphics pose a serious threat to the primacy of writing. The relationship of word and image is changing in our culture, and this change is now related to the rise of computer graphics, as it was related to film and television in the past century." - Jay David Bolter, Paper given at Beloit College Symposium on the future of print culture; reprinted as "Virtual Silence" in Liberal Education v84 n3 1998, found via Newscan and my friend Rick Barry.

The TeleRead take: This is exactly why a national digital library isn't enough. It needs to be a true part of the educational system and to be friendly to readers (through easily accessed material) as well as writers (through fair compensation, stable archives, stable links, and freedom of expression).
posted by David Rothman at 1:45 AM | permanent link

"On the good side, Net thinkers are said to generate work quickly and make connections easily. 'They are more in control of facts than we were 40 years ago,' says Bernard Cooperman, a history professor at the University of Maryland. But they also value information-gathering over deliberation, breadth over depth, and other people's arguments over their own." - Washington Post, July 16.

The TeleRead take: Time to put modern, well-edited books on the Net en masse--and to change teaching methods so that students must think rather than just spew out facts?
posted by David Rothman at 5:41 AM | permanent link

"A cartoon in the New Yorker several weeks ago said it all. Two people are in a bookstore. One stands in front of a section called 'Self-Improvement,' while the other is browsing 'Self-Involvement.' That, exactly, summarizes the state of the art of literary fiction in these United States in the year 2002." - Jonathan Yardley, Washington Post, July 14, 2002.

The TeleRead take: No industry needs "disruptive technology" more than publishing does.
posted by David Rothman at 5:34 AM | permanent link

Under the TeleRead vision, funding could come from a variety of private as well as public sources. TeleRead would be a logical destination for some of the money made during the dotcom bubble. But is there still some money around? Very definitely. Some dotcom people--not all, of course--wisely sold and diversified at the peak of the bubble. An interesting New York Times article today discusses these matters.
posted by David Rothman at 11:41 AM | permanent link

"EAST LANSING - The library is using a new method to get more people - especially busy people - to read books. The East Lansing Public Library offers a service that delivers a five-minute selection from a fiction or nonfiction book to a person's e-mail address. The service is free and the recipient doesn't have to be an East Lansing library cardholder." - Lansing State Journal, July 10, via Pocket PC eBooks Watch.

The TeleRead take: Imagine the possibilities when many more thousands of books are online. With a TeleRead-style library, in fact, publishers could use tags to choose the locations and sizes of the excerpts. They could be sent out as often as readers desired.

At any rate, excerpts make plenty of sense. What a great way for busy people to read within their schedules, then be jogged later on.

Further information: Actually the East Lansing effort relies on a service called Chapter a Day.
posted by David Rothman at 6:42 AM | permanent link

TeleRead would use money from private as well as public sources, one way to promote more freedom of expression. Dotcom crash or not, some New Economy fortunes are still intact--not to mention Old Economy fortunes. The New York Times observes that "most entrepreneurs and executives seem to have found a middle ground: not as wealthy as they had hoped, but still cushioned by the fact that they sold their businesses not far from the top of the market."
posted by David Rothman at 4:39 AM | permanent link

"Librarians, locally and across the country, increasingly have been trying to appeal to teenage readers by offering a wider range of books, magazines and hybrid book-comic book "graphic" novels that have become popular in recent years. They even offer prizes and gift certificates." - Washington Post, July 13.

The TeleRead take: Content shouldn't be the only issue here. What about the medium? As a group, screen-oriented teenagers are better prospects for e-books than, say, people in their 40s. And noted here earlier, an Ohio library is paying special attention to e-books for the young.
posted by David Rothman at 2:53 AM | permanent link

"If you want to feed me bogus MP3 files to quell my lust for pirated tunes, that's fine as long as I download them of my own volition from your machine. If you break into my machine--or even wander into my machine unmolested through open ports--you're a trespasser. If you change anything, you're a vandal." - Alex Salkever in BusinessWeek Online, July 9, writing about the Orwellian anti-piracy scheme hatched by Rep. Howard Berman.

The TeleRead take: Will Hollywood copyright greedsters and their allies someday be held in the same contempt that Enron and WorldCom executives are held today? Just what kind of post-government job might be in store for Howard Berman? The ever-escalating gall of of the copyright interests is surely the rival of the Enron variety. In this case, however, we're also talking about basic violations of Constitutional rights--violations to be purchased through massive campaign donations. I myself am pro-copyright, but people like Bermam really stretch me to the limit. He isn't a terrorist but in his own way is a long-term threat to the stability of the American political system. Could bin Laden be a secret backer of his?

A reminder of the obvious: No, not everyone in Hollywood is a corrupt greedster. Ways must be found to compensate hardworking singers, actors, writers, directors and others. But e-thuggery in the Berman vein is not the answer.
posted by David Rothman at 5:24 AM | permanent link

Scott Carlson asks that question in the July 12 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education. And the answers from some librarians aren't encouraging. Book circulation is hurting as more and more students go for information online, and meanwhile some new libraries are playing up multimedia rooms at the expense of the traditional stacks.

The TeleRead take: Just a fraction of books today are digitized, and their publishers can't provide the archiving and link stability that a TeleRead-style library system could--to the benefit of society and publishing alike. Let's not neglect those stacks.

May the Chronicle article and Michael Cader's recent observations serve as useful warnings to publishers. Both the book industry and libraries would benefit from new technology and new business models. That's what TeleRead is about. But it isn't here yet.
posted by David Rothman at 6:00 AM | permanent link

"The worst bear market in a generation deepened yesterday as stocks plunged for the second day, leaving the two major indexes at their lowest levels since 1997." - New York Times, July 11.

The TeleRead take: We don't just need tougher laws on disclosure and corporate conduct, but also better ways to present the information to the public. A well-stocked national digital library system could help, especially if it were well-integrated with databases at the SEC and major stock exchanges.
posted by David Rothman at 5:45 AM | permanent link

Check out ieSpell--a blog-oriented spelling checker for Internet Explorer. Works great with Blogger and apparently with Radio. Dave Winer mentions it in Scripting News.
posted by David Rothman at 5:26 AM | permanent link

So what do wireless phones and handhelds mean in the grand scheme of things--whether data collection or e-books. Read Karl Bridges' piece in LIS News on The Wireless Future of Library Computing: Implications of Docomo Cell Phones.

The TeleRead take: For years TeleRead has been keen on wireless. If nothing else, it can help close the Digital Divide, especially as the power of Wi-Fi-style tech goes up and the costs tumble.

(Thanks for the pointer, Jenny.)
posted by David Rothman at 5:12 AM | permanent link

"The 'preview issue' of Bookmarks, based in San Mateo, began circulating this week. Its founders are two former software and technology company executives; its target is media-savvy Gen-Xers who haven't really read a book since college but are eager to reconnect with literature, though uncertain how to do it. Bookmarks--which bills itself as the journal 'for everyone who hasn't read everything'--is a glossy, slightly fizzy bimonthly survey of classic and contemporary literature designed for readers who like their graphic interfaces glitzy and their information in strobe-like bites. Think of it as a literary halfway house for recovering dot-comers and their codependents." - Los Angeles Times, July 10.

The TeleRead take: What a much-needed project when so many newspapers are cutting back their book review sections! I hope that Bookmarks can establish relationships with Project Gutenberg and other public-domain providers of online classics--and also commercial publishers of all kinds, paper and electronic. While Bookmarks will appear on paper, it will also have an electronic incarnation. Meanwhile you can email the magazine for a free preview issue on pulped wood.

Oh, and here's an instant clarification or correction. Commenting on the LA Times piece, the Bookmarks site says, "We're definitely not just for Gen-Xers."

posted by David Rothman at 3:57 AM | permanent link

The book industry isn't growing readers first enough. And print on demand and the Net-based marketing of used books could create more competition--and problems--for publishers.

So says Michael Cader, a book-packager who writes the useful and readable PublishersLunch newsletter and who has spoken out before on the industry's sales problems.

Check out a recent National Public Radio interview in RealAudio. Interestingly, Cader mentions the possibility of news business models such as subscriptions, and that's moving closer and closer to TeleRead territory. Tax money and private contributions contributions could not pay for all books. But subscription plans could help--a point made on our page How TeleRead Could Help Good Publishers Financially and in Other Ways.

Note to NPR: No, no, no, we are not saying that NPR endorses TeleRead, though I myself confess to liking NPR. Of course, the network's terms-of-use page could stand more work in the links-policy area.
posted by David Rothman at 9:27 AM | permanent link

One of the premises of TeleRead is that the Net by itself isn't enough--that schoolchildren and other library users need focused knowledge, not just the variety they can pick up by wandering from Web site to site. A well-stocked national digital library system would help endlessly. And so would better guidance for students on the matter of evaluating the information already on the Web.

Now, via T.H.E. Journal, comes yet another study of Net use within K-12, and buried within it is the following: "The school's library curriculum did contain one lesson that let students decide if information was reliable or biased. One lesson, however, did not appear to be enough. As we observed students at work, we saw much more effort directed at finding answers to the questions rather than evaluating the quality of the information. This implies that teachers constantly need to encourage students to evaluate what they find. This should be a good thing as the process of evaluating information goes beyond the simple retrieval of facts."

Quite correctly the study's authors, Drs. Douglas W. Green and Thomas O'Brien of Binghamton University, noted: "Staff development should show teachers how to create more situations where students engage in higher-order thinking. Simply showing teachers how to use computer applications and the Internet is not likely to accomplish that." That, of course, should also be true with e-books, not just the Net.

Titlted "The Internet's Impact on Teacher Practice and Classroom Culture," the study also looked at Digital Divide-type issues and said: "Teachers in our study felt that students with Internet access at home have an advantage over students who do not. Even though it may not be possible to eliminate the entire advantage, teachers should provide additional time online to students who lack access at home without awarding higher grades for papers printed on home computer systems."

TeleRead, of course, would address such issues by driving down the costs of machines fit for K-12 use and other applications.
posted by David Rothman at 5:12 AM | permanent link

Raymundo Pedraza of Monterrey, Mexico, a TeleRead contributor who has worked in the past in radio journalism, offers his personal perspective in the article below on National Public Radio's linking policy. - DR

“...the linking should not (a) suggest that NPR promotes or endorses any third party’s causes, ideas, Web sites, products or services...” From the “Terms of use” of NPR.

The language here can be tricky. What is meant by "promotes or endorses"?

Links by themselves, of course, do neither. NPR is weakening the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution with this part of its Web usage policy.

If a radio station’s Web site doesn’t authorize certain people to indicate a specific virtual location--through coding on their own Web pages--it’s almost like ordering some radio listeners not to reveal the frequency on which they heard particular news or commentary. NPR isn't an official voice of the U.S. government, but it is "public" radio and should advance freedom of expression, not restrict linking.

The above isn't the only example of how NPR wants the right to choose which listeners can use Web links to tell others where to find specific items. Here is another:

“(b) Use NPR content for inappropriate commercial purposes.” Idem.

In this case, who is going to be the judge who will decide what is appropriate commercial purpose and what is not? I hope that NPR does not have its own team of censors to make these decisions. Which takes me to the following:

“NPR is an organization committed to the highest journalistic ethics and standards and to independent, noncommercial journalism, both in fact and appearance.” Idem.

Who decides what is independent, noncommercial journalism? The same people who judge what is an appropriate commercial purpose and what is not?

With these policies, National Public Radio risks setting itself against the intrinsic meaning of its own name.
posted by David Rothman at 10:07 PM | permanent link

"...legal rulings and the service terms of an increasing number of websites adamantly claim that links are nothing more than tools used to steal content, corrupt journalistic ethics and wreak havoc with corporate profits." Wired News, July 8.

The TeleRead take: ...unless these same sites are linking to smaller sites without lawyers on retainer.

posted by David Rothman at 6:52 AM | permanent link

Wired News columnist M.J. Rose writes of eBook Web.org's first annniversary (happy birthday, Glenn!) and also supplies some upbeat stats on today's e-book biz:

"McGraw-Hill reports that its e-book sales are up 55 percent over this time last year.

"Palm Digital Media sold nearly 180,000 titles in 2001.

"PerfectBound sold more e-books in the first five months of 2002 than in all of 2001.

"More than 5 million copies of Microsoft Reader have been distributed for use on desktop, notebook and Pocket PC systems.

"Simon & Schuster saw double-digit growth in e-book sales from the first quarter in 2001 to the first quarter in 2002."

While TeleRead's library model would certainly help popularize e-books, it's clear that with or without TeleRead, e-books are not going away. A recent Washington Post story did not offer a balanced picture.

posted by David Rothman at 6:44 AM | permanent link

Amos Bokros, author of the article below, is TeleRead's Southeastern Coordinator. Also check out his essay on e-books for people with reading disabilities. - DR

Ben Bova's Cyberbooks is a science-fiction novel that gives TeleRead supporters--and other e-book boosters--some concrete lessons in how to convince the public of the benefits. This 13-year-old satire is eerily on target.

Cyberbooks is about an MIT software engineer by the name of Carl Lewis who invents the first electronic book. Carl is a naive idealist, and he thinks his invention will revolutionize the publishing industry and bring enormous benefits to all mankind. He reasons that e-books will make books inexpensive and available to everybody everywhere.

E-books, as Carl sees it, will enable books to be published that are of high quality, but unfortunately not financially lucrative. A sad reality for businesspeole is that approximately 75 percent of all published books actually lose money for publishers, and that most go out of print or sell for a fraction of their original price. You can buy Cyberbooks today for less than $1--in fact, a penny (shipping cost excluded) if someone hasn't made a typo.

Just as e-book boosters do in real life, Carl also sees other advantages in digital books. They would be good for blind people, visually impaired and those with reading disabilities because e-books are able to actually read out loud anything in a digital format. Also, e-books would help the environment because fewer trees would be used for paper.

Many people in the established publishing industry, however, fear e-books. Publishers, book dealers, book store owners, distributors and printers feel that digital books will cost them their livelihood. And they try to thwart Carl.

You might say that Carl is like the main character in The Man in The White Suit, an old black-and-white English movie about Sidney Stratton, who invents a cloth material that cannot be destroyed, become dirty or wear out. Sidney thinks his invention will bring all humanity to a New Age of abundant wealth besides making himself rich. But both the factory workers and factory owners oppose the new super cloth material. The factory workers feel they will lose their jobs because if clothes do not wear out people will not buy new clothes. Business people also feel that this new cloth material will destroy their businesses because they will not be able to create a need for people to buy more clothes. The climax of the movie is a united effort by both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to crush the invention of this new material and prevent it from ever getting into the market.

Carl Lewis's journey is similar to Sidney's as the e-book inventor travels through the darker regions of the book publishing industry.

As the New York Post review of Cyberbooks put it, "Those unfamiliar with the publishing industry may think Bova exaggerates. Can booksellers really return all their merchandise for a full refund? Do editors spend their days at meetings discussing marketing categories and authors' track records, leaving no time to actually read manuscripts? Does the size of the advance paid to an author actually determine the sales of his book? Do giant oil conglomerates really take over publishing houses and then run them idiotically? Alas, the answer to all these questions is Yes."

Fittingly, in Bova's satire, the plot mimics the cheap trashy novels that actually make money for the publishers. In Cyberbooks we see a power struggle within the industry. There is murder, romance, mystery and, of course, sex.

Carl Lewis is forced to give up his dream of the electronic book after a successful effort to stop his invention by those with an invested interest in the established publishing industry. But he triumphs in the end.

In my opinion, via Carl, Ben Bova unwittingly shows what TeleRead supporters and others must do to make e-books a common reality in the future. Here is a list of lessons from Cyberbooks that must be understood by anyone promoting electronic books.

Lesson One: Do not present electronic books as a radical idea which will revolutionize society. Perhaps the biggest mistake former congressmen Newt Gingrich made was promoting a radical interpretation of Alvin Tofler's Third Wave to the American people. Americans and most of the world want slow reform. When any new technology is presented as a radical change, no matter how beneficial, most people will see it as a threat to an establish way of life.

In convincing people of the benefits of electronic books, we should emphasize that electronic books will not replace printed books. Rather, e-books will be an addition to printed books. Paperbacks did not replace hardcover books. Libraries did not put bookstores out of business. In the same way television and video rental stores have not put movie theaters out of business. Each new technology only expands the market.

Electronic books will not replace books for people happy with the established way books are printed and distributed. E-books are a method to help people who do not have quick inexpensive access to a variety of printed books. Therefore the emphasis at TeleRead should always be on how electronic books are a good for those who really need them. Such as those who are poor and live in areas without decent libraries. TeleRead should also emphasize how electronic books are good for those who are blind and have reading disabilities. In each of these cases we are pointing out how electronic books can help in areas where traditional books do not serve readers well. In all of these cases we are not threatening people with established interest in the status quo.

Lesson Two: Along with not scaring people, we at TeleRead should not touch sensitive political quagmires which only alienates our mission from other groups. Let us take two examples. In the past while promoting the benefits of electronic books, I have pointed out that books could be available in all languages; with the development of powerful new translating software, any book could be translated into any language immediately. I suggested this could solve the dilemma of bilingual education. I quickly learned afterwards this was no way to make friends. For many people any idea even suggesting that bilingual education had some benefits would quickly kill any idea associated with it.

Another benefit of electronic books that I used to emphasize was e-books not only could make books available to the blind, visually impaired, and those with reading disabilities, but also, via audio versions, help those who are functionally illiterate. I was accused of encouraging people to remain functionally illiterate and not learn to read. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a matter of fact e-books are being used as powerful tools to learn the skill of reading.

Lesson Three: Along with not touching sensitive issues in regards to electronic books, TeleRead should never surrender itself to either the political left or the political right. The Teleread effort is bipartisan. Anyone who considers himself liberal, conservative, capitalist, or socialist should be able to support TeleRead. I am very happy that William F. Buckley Jr. supports our initiative. But I would be just as happy if anyone of the left would also support us.

Extremist groups probably do not take much interest in TeleRead, and they shouldn't be encouraged to do so. I remember promoting TeleRead to radical environmentalists in California. I talked about how e-books could save trees and help the environment. These radical environmentalists retorted that E-books were just another form of computers making people more materialistic and encouraging corporate greed. Besides that, the radical environmentalists argued that books should be made out of recycled garbage. At the same time I have heard market fundamentalists argue that TeleRead is simply an expansion of the federal government.

These extreme groups, whether of the left or of the right, are in their own universe of reality. No matter what the benefits of electronic books, extremists groups will never concede the value of electronic books. Since the extremest groups are not interested in the TeleRead concept, TeleRead should not work at trying to draw them in.

Lesson Four: The only way for electronic books and TeleRead to succeed is for inexpensive, powerful tablets and laptops to be available and popularly used. Twenty years ago when I first became a futurist I promoted the concept of distance education, and I was laughed at. Many people argued to me that individuals would never sit in front of a computer and take a class from some school thousands of miles away. Today millions of people all across the globe communicate all day over the world through the Internet.

We are seeing an explosion of courses being made available all over the Internet through existing educational institutions. The Highway of the Internet was needed for people to start taking the concept of distance education, distance health-care, and distance legal services seriously. We must encourage distribution of tablets and laptops. In the same way that Apple computers donated computers to grade schools before educational software was readily available; We need to encourage computer companies to donate laptops to grade schools, high schools, and colleges. Anyone who has seen how young people cannot go anywhere without their cell phones could easily see how e-books could be just as portable and popular.

Lesson Five: While many older people will find e-books beneficial, it will be the younger generation that will truly bond with electronic books. An example of this was with word processors. Even though word processors were clearly superior to typewriters, many people who had grown up with typewriters simply could never switch to word processors. That is perfectly okay. However, we at TeleRead or any other futuristic organization must recognize that a voluntary evolutionary approach is how we can convince people that our new paradigms will work. If we at TeleRead, or any other futuristic organization, take a radical coercive method we will fail to convince people of our new paradigm, and for that matter we should fail for trying this arrogant and nondemocratic approach.

Lesson Six: The last thing that we can learn from Cyberbooks is that we need to win our war with a Trojan Horse. In the novel Cyberbooks we have a happier ending than The Man in The White Suit. After Carl Lewis is defeated, it is suggested to him that Lewis promote his electronic book as a toy rather than the substitute for a book. The novel finishes 50 years in the future and electronic books have completely replaced printed books. Carl Lewis marries the woman he loves and dies a billionaire.

TeleRead is not about making money for its supporters, but perhaps the lessons from Cyberbooks can help us succeed in our own way.
posted by David Rothman at 6:12 AM | permanent link

"Ordering, processing and shelving books takes specific knowledge and a lot of time. Elementary library aides who work three to six hours a day cannot be expected to do all of this plus aid classes every hour. And secondary librarians also cannot fulfill the jobs of information literacy teacher, resource consultant and library manager without having full-time clerical help." - Sandy Schuckett, V.P., Legislation, California School Library Association in a letter in the July 9 LA Times.

The TeleRead take: Needless to say, TeleRead would allow librarians to spend more time on mentoring and less time moving around paper and cardboard.
posted by David Rothman at 6:02 AM | permanent link

"Prolonged time playing video games could cause people to lose concentration, get angry easily and have trouble associating with others, a Japanese professor's research has suggested. In a survey conducted by Akio Mori, a professor in Nihon University's College of Humanities and Sciences, it was found that the longer people spent playing video games, the less activity they showed in the prefrontal region of their brains, which governs emotion and creativity." - Mainichi Shimbun, July 8, 2002 via Slashdot.

The TeleRead take: One more reason to use technology to popularize books, which encourage concentration? Actually, as Shashdotters have noted, there jury is still out on this one. But it's not out on the desirability of books.

posted by David Rothman at 5:37 AM | permanent link

"A summer reading loss of three months accumulates to a two-year gap by the time poor kids are in middle school, even if their schools are equally effective." - Richard Allington, a professor in the College of Education's School of Teaching and Learning at the University of Florida, as quoted by the Lakeland Online Ledger, July 4.

The TeleRead take: Another indication of the need to make reading a family affair. Under TeleRead, parents would find it easier than ever to be good role models, increasing the chances of children reading at any time of the year.
posted by David Rothman at 4:17 AM | permanent link

"...since the machine comes with wireless Ethernet connectivity built in, using it in tablet mode becomes a natural way of surfing the Web (provided you already have a list of favorites). It's also a great way of looking at electronic books or magazines." Michael Miller, PC Magazine's editor in chief, writing in the June 25 issue.

The TeleRead take: No miracles expected, given the prices of the first TabletPCs. Just the same, imagine the potential when the hardware is less expensive. The TabletPC in many ways overlaps with the vision I had for TeleReaders back in the early '90s.
posted by David Rothman at 1:14 PM | permanent link

Is copyright lurking in the background as a reason for the mess at AOL Time Warner? This morning's New York Time dissects AOL Time Warner, but leaves out the possibility that disagreements over copyright could be at least a contributory factor.

Odd, isn't it? This was to be a merger based on "convergence." And yet so far we have not seen a big push to reach into the company's vault and get "Citizen Kane" and other classic movies on the Net now, along with more recent works. It isn't just technology. As a cable modem user I've seen full-length movies from other companies' sites that looked almost as good as those on television. Even if the the technology is costly and flawed, it's far enough along for AOL to be doing far more than it is right now.

So why this underperformance? My theory is that some of the more clueful members of the AOL faction indeed wanted the movies on the Net in a big way without delay, but that the traditionalists from the Time Warner side may have interfered because of piracy fears. Beyond Bob Pittman's focus on the here and now of dialup, this might also help explain why the company's broadband efforts have let down both techies and financial analysts. Some months ago a journalist joked that Hollywood types feared broadband because it would let people pirate material at a faster rate, and he may have been more on target than he thought.

The other copyright-related issue is that Hollywood traditionalists from the Time Warner side have felt that their precious creations mustn't be tampered with, and that absolute control must be maintained. Not the best 'tude for interactive entertainment and fan sites.

As a theory, the idea of convergence made business sense on the whole. Problem was the execution. One wonders how AOL Time Warner would have fared if Chairman Steve Case hadn't been tragically distracted by the brain cancer his brother suffered. Sympathy over the illness and death, of course. But it meant that Case was not doing his job.

Now that the CEO job has more of Steve Case's attention again, will he be able to reverse the debacle? Don't count on immediate miracles, given the huge piles of debt. But certain copyright-related changes just might help. One would be for AOL to make clear to fellow members of the RIAA that customer-friendly business models and the gentler forms of technologically based protections are better than Draconian copyright laws and tightly corsetted content. That would be one way to clear the way for an explosion of fresh new material on broadband--beyond the usual Hollywood fare--and increase the appeal of the high-speed Net access that AOL wants to sell its tens of millions of subscribers.

Especially in an AOL context, a little thought emerges. Could it really be just a coincidence that the growth of broadband fell off when Hollyood and its friends in Washington and the courts kept strangling users with oppressive copyright laws? Needless to say, the effects really hit home with the anti-Napster jihad, which actually hurt the demand for AOL's broadband services by removing some of the very content that enticed customers to upgrade. Obviously business cycles and other factors played a role, but the C Word just might have figured in as well.

On the positive, AOL is reported to be on the cusp of a breakthrough that could slash the cost of video and audio on the Net. Will AOL be able to overcome copyright-related fears sufficient to take advantage of this? Stay tuned. Perhaps Case's more active interest in the company these days will make a difference. As former AOL shareholder (well, "former" except for a few stray shares), however, I wouldn't rush back into the stock. Wi-Fi is a great preview of the disruptive technologies that reduce the value of AOL's expensive cable-related investments over the long run, and beyond that, paper publishing won't grow nearly as fast as the electronic variety--a trend that will accelerate when readable tablet-style computers and e-ink become common.

* * *

Needless to say, the above does not even address another issue--whether regulators should have allowed the AOL Time Warner merger to happen in the first place. What is striking is that even with the distribution advantages in place, despite some setbacks like the loss of 2.1 million cable subscribers, the company still have not been able to get things right. Perhaps regulators in the States and elsewhere unwittingly struck a blow for "small is beautiful" when they freed AOL and Time Warner to bungle in such a spectacular way.
posted by David Rothman at 10:10 AM | permanent link

Linton Weeks of the Washington Post repeats the same tired arguments against e-books that we've been hearing for eons. His main point is that sales of e-books and hardware from big companies are low. Duh.

Only deep in the story do we see his grudging admission: "For one thing, proponents say, young people may adapt to e-books quicker than old folks." All right, Linton. In that particular case, you are on target.

Weeks, however, plays down e-ink and similar technologies around the bend that could dramatically boost the appeal of e-books. He simply alludes briefly and vaguely to the fact that "Microsoft and Adobe are focusing on improving the 'readability' of the screens." What's that supposed to mean? A reader on the way with a shade around the screen? An improved ClearType? Not too helpful. Surely he meant more than his accompanying reference to the TabletPC?

The real news is what's ahead, not the already-known fact that the industry has disappointed piracy-fixated mainstream publishers with low sales of e-books in inconvenient formats.

Meanwhile thanks to Random House's Stuart Applebaum for pointing out an important fact, which the Post buries--namely, that book buyers are largely older than 40 and not always open to new tech.

This is one reason why libraries are doing better with e-books than commercial sellers of them--and why TeleRead could help publishers by using volume to drive down prices of hardware and content alike for the budget-minded of all ages. I'm not alone in these sentiments. The New York Times has just observed that "Libraries are one of the few places where there is real demand for electronic books, which so far have been a dud with consumers."

Some cause and effect here? Time for the Post to stop looking backwards and be more open to the possibilities of different business models as well as better screens and the like.

Followup, July 11: Just saw Tim O'Reilly's well-done reply to the Post article. I especially liked one of his observations: "The eBook that simply mimics the print book on screen is a transitional form, just like the early 'moving pictures' that simply pointed a camera at actors on a stage." Exactly, exactly! This is why TeleRead is so keen on a library system with stable links--through which writers could reliably refer to other works, thereby increasing adding much value beyond that of pulped wood (accompanying multimedia would be another possibility, of course). Not to knock paper books, of course. Each medium has its place.

posted by David Rothman at 6:57 AM | permanent link

"Challenging the World Wide Web's fundamental premise of linking, a Danish court ordered an Internet news service to stop linking to Web sites of Danish newspapers. Copenhagen's lower bailiff's court ruled Friday that Newsbooster.com was in direct competition with the newspapers and that the links it provided to specific news articles damaged the value of the newspapers' advertisements." - AP, July 5.

The TeleRead take: This ruling is all the more reason for National Public Radio to stop saying it can withdraw links. Bad example. In effect, like it or not, NPR is giving comfort to greedsters like the Danish publishers behind the suit.

Ironic, isn't it? Publishers are turning out to be among the biggest threat to freedom of the online press. Perhaps Danish newspapers need to get sued for a deep link to a company they're writing about. But then, that wouldn't happen, would it? I suspect that publishers of this ilk don't do risky investigative journalism via the Web anyway. I, for one, would advocate a boycott of Danish products in areas other than high tech if the ruling isn't overturned. The supposedly liberal Danes, or at least the plaintiffs, are clueless compared to the online Pravda--by far more Jeffersonian, with a splendid collection of statements from understandably outraged Russian journalists.

Quite in character, the Newsbooster portal, the defendant in the case, has deeplinked to relevant news stories.

In a statement posted on the Web yesterday, Newsbooster said: "The Danish Court with Judge Michael Kistrup decided today to issue a preluminary injunction against our Search Engine Newsbooster.com for the use of direct 'Hyperlinking.'

"Newsbooster covers over 4,500 mainstream and specialized news sources. The Danish publishers news sources represent 28 and only 0.6 % of the sources in the Newsbooster service.

"Newsbooster.com will together with our search engine colleagues decide if we will continue the fight on a higher level."

CEO Anders Lautrup-Larsen was quoted: "Today is a very sad day for Newsbooster and the entire Internet. The backbone of the Internet is challenged in a way we never seen before!"

(I've tweaked the English in the material from Newsbooster.)

posted by David Rothman at 5:01 AM | permanent link