The World eBook Fair begins this Saturday, July 4th, coinciding with Project Gutenberg’s 39th anniversary.
To celebrate, the World eBook Fair members are providing free access to over two million books between July 4th and August 4th.
found via ResourceShelf
If you are involved with the selection or ordering process, then you are very likely to be familiar with searching for items by the International Standard Book Number, or ISBN. The newer, 13-digit ISBN is actually based on the European Article Number, or EAN, which makes books consistent with most international trade goods. The EAN was developed as an expansion of the common Universal Product Code, or UPC.
Enough theory? How about web sites that offer lookup services that can help you find booksellers, prices, and even reviews and summaries of the books you wish to acquire?
For comparison, here are links to results for the same book (Stephen King : The Dark Tower):
Sources and further information:
Amidst a great many other topics, HTML 5 has been on my mind the past couple of weeks. It started on Tuesday, May 26th, with Kevin Yank posting HTML 5 : Now or Never? on the SitePoint blog. He was floating the question of whether or not they should look into publishing a book on HTML 5 now, or if they need to wait until it matures enough for developers to use with confidence. If you read his post, and especially if you look over the comments, you will see that there is a full range of opinions (including that HTML 5 should never be implemented) by developers about the topic.
This remained a relatively minor, background issue until two days later, Thursday, May 28th. On that day Google announce the existence of a new project called Google Wave. My initial thought was that Google was simply creating their version of a FaceBook/Twitter/Blogging style platform. The more I looked, the more I realized that this was much different, and much more important, than a differently branded service. Wave is something that has the potential to change many, many aspects of how we use the internet.
What is Google Wave? I have spent a good part of last week trying to distill it into a couple of paragraphs, and am not having much success. The overall essence of it is something that I haven’t yet wrapped my head around, but here are a few aspects of it that will hopefully illustrate some of it:
It is a communication platform that allows users to send, receive, and use a variety of information (think communications like e-mails, IM, tweets, feeds, etc.) in a way that offers greater control, speed, and usability. Messaging becomes “real-time”, with your keystrokes being sent live to the person you are communcating with (unless you select to hold the message until you are ready). The effect of this is that it becomes possible to hold a real-time conversation with others utilizing a variety of communication forms simultaneously. You can incorporate text, images, documents, and other digital formats into the conversation in a free-flowing manner that saves time, effort and reduces confusion.
To quote from the introduction to an interview, “Email is asynchronous conversation. Instant messaging, by contrast, is synchronous. Wave is both.“ Possibly the best general description of Wave could be that it lets users and groups easily communicate and collaborate in one interface, using whatever editing/communication/collaboration techniques fit the task at hand. Think of it as a collaboration mash-up tool.
A few places to find further info:
Watch for the technological shift from these developments. This will not only give us new and improved tools to perform tasks and work together (think of the possibilities for online meetings and conferencing), but will set standards for what will be expected from web presences. Our OPACS may have some new goals to aim for.
Note added later: I have had a busy week, and forgot to actually address the relationship between HTML 5 and Google Wave. I do so in another post, Why HTML 5. Apologies for not getting it right the first time!
Cory Doctorow has an interesting take on the differing attitude of copyright between those who wish to wish to honor a creative work and those who wish to diminish it. An excerpt:
“The upshot of this is that you’re on much more solid ground if you want to quote or otherwise reference a work for the purposes of rubbishing it than if you are doing so to celebrate it. This is one of the most perverse elements of copyright law: the reality that loving something doesn’t confer any right to make it a part of your creative life.”
An added bonus is a reference to a Firefly-based fan fiction that I hadn’t encountered before, titled My Own Kind of Freedom.
found via Library Link of the Day (16 May 2009)
Saw a post on TechCrunch that indicated that Amazon has opened their offerings of blog subscriptions for the Kindle reader to all blogs that sign up. So now Libology is available to readers of the Kindle… with two caveats:
So really, if you don’t feel the need to pay to read this stuff, don’t. Keep reading this stuff for free, though. And if you are philosophically inclined (or reclined) against my getting paid, then, again, don’t.
Seriously, if you are really into the Kindle, and find the blog-perusing experience to be great, then I am glad to provide Libology as an option, just as I have provided a mobile-browser friendly version. They do offer a 14-day trial if you want an excuse to try it out. Just don’t feel guilty about canceling… I understand, trust me!
Was the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine incident an isolated case, or is it the first of several Elsevier journals that only appear to be legit?
Michael Hansen, CEO Of Elsevier’s Health Sciences Division, issued a statement today that suggests that a division of the company may have created the bogus journal without the knowledge of the top levels of the company:
It has recently come to my attention that from 2000 to 2005, our Australia office published a series of sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures. This was an unacceptable practice, and we regret that it took place.
We are currently conducting an internal review but believe this was an isolated practice from a past period in time. It does not reflect the way we operate today. The individuals involved in the project have long since left the company. I have affirmed our business practices as they relate to what defines a journal and the proper use of disclosure language with our employees to ensure this does not happen again.
Note that this statement uses the phrase “published a series of sponsored article compilation publications”. Some sleuthing by Jonathan Rochkind and Bill Hooker indicates that Excerpta Medica, a subsidiary of Elsevier, might have published quite a few of these sponsored-yet-unacknowledged journals.
My own poking around Excerpta Medica’s website with Google has produced an interesting Pdf titled Best practices for managing publications through a drug’s lifecycle and balancing scientific rigour and credibility with commercial goals. The document is a summary of a presentation given at by Hester Kuipers, who at the time was Program Director, Medical Communications for Exerpta Medica. Here is a brief quote:
Scientific publications in peer-reviewed medical journals are a valuable and credible vehicle to support a medical marketing strategy. Though part of most marketing plans, publications are not a promotional activity, but rather a medical one. The relationship between scientific publications and marketing messages can best be described as the first supporting the second rather than the second driving the first.
The presentation makes it clear that the research must have primacy over the promotion; hopefully the “series of sponsored article compilation publications” turns out to be the exception and not the rule for Exerpta Medica. Elsevier should investigate this thoroughly and publicly acknowledge the extent of the deception; the credibility of each and every one of their peer-reviewed journals is at stake.
some links found via ResourceShelf and through postings on the Cooperative Information Resources Managemnt (CIRM) list
Peter Murray has an incredibly good selection of links about the Google Book Search Settlement on the Disruptive Library Technology Jester blog. Really. Spend some time perusing them.
Ever hear of the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine? Sounds official, as well as medically specific. Did you know it was published by Elsevier? That is is Peer Reviewed? And that it published an article on the effectiveness of Fosamax?
I worked in a pharmacy for eight years; I have seen first-hand the differences between the drug manufacturer’s publicity and the actual usefulness of medicines. I am not too surprised that someone at Merck did this (though not as surprised as I will be if the FDA doesn’t lift a finger to make it clear that this level of deception is unacceptable), but am a little surprised that Elsevier went along (though maybe not too surprised (here, too)).
This is a horrible situation, and library organizations should be demanding that Elsevier establish the bona fides of the journals we pay for, and that our patrons use for their research. Sure, we can probably trust that the big-name journals are what they say they are, but there are hundreds of obscure journals, with titles sounding just as official as the fake one, that we cannot know for sure who they represent, and how they conduct their research, without a great deal of research. Elsevier needs to salvage their credibility, and soon.
found via Bibliographic Wilderness
Publisher Confidential is a creation by the Unshelved crew that strives to convey to publishers what libraries wish they would know. It consists of brief statements illustrated with the familiar Mallville Public Library staff. The booklet is being distributed to the BookExpo America (BEA) mailing list, so a lot of publisher’s representative will see it and hopefully take heed.
Some of the selections I especially like upon first reading:
There are many more… and all are worth reading.
via the Unshelved Blog
ALA TechSource has a brief blogger forum post on the state of E-Book Readers. The quote that I think is most worth thinking about comes from Jason Griffey:
E-books are the future of reading in a very real way, simply because at some point they will be too cheap to not use. One of my staff brought a receipt to me this week for a laptop that the library bought in 2000. It was $3600. I just priced netbooks for my library, and can get a machine that is ridiculously more powerful than the year-2000 laptop for under $350. The Kindle, and most other e-readers, are hovering around the $350 or so dollar mark right now. In ten years, what will they cost? How can paper continue to compete with Moore’s Law?
Not only does it make sense, for reasons of legality (terms of use) and usability, to wait before purchasing and implementing E-Readers in a library, but it also makes sense from a monetary standpoint. Amazon’s Kindle is king of the hill right now, but I think the big one is yet to arrive. Watch for it, however: when the convergence of price, usability, and usefulness happens, you want to be ready.
Library Journal has announced the winners of the 2009 Movers & Shakers awards, and as usual, the recipients are fantastic and enthusiastic innovators who look for new ways for libraries to be better:
I hope each of them has read What We Need, and that this year marks a reversal of the trend of institutional discouragement that has plagued recipients in the past. If you have a Mover & Shaker in your organization, celebrate the award; if you have people who are potential movers and shakers (and I am not limiting this to the award), be sure to find ways to encourage them.
seen first on Stephen’s Lighthouse
Added 16 March 2009: LISNews posted a link to a Photo Gallery page on Library Journal… lots of smiling professionals!
Authors Guild: Contracts Forced Amazon to Flip on Kindle is an article on CNet.com in which the Authors Guild asserts that Amazon turned off the Kindle’s Text-to-speech function (unless authorized by a book’s publisher) due to contractual obligations, not pressure from the Guild.
The response from Amazon’s spokesperson was simply “Kindle 2’s experimental text-to-speech feature is legal.”
found via LISNews
Amazon.com has given in to the Publisher’s Guild on the issue of text-to-speech capabilities in the Kindle 2.
In their press release, Amazon states up front that “Kindle 2’s experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given.“ In this statement, they are correct. If I read a book to someone who is visually or otherwise impaired, it takes a stretch of the imagination to suggest that I am actually staging a performance.
In addition, as I stated when the issue was first raised:
“How would someone with a visual impairment be able to order the audio book version of a title without using a screen reader? In addition, how would they know whether a website allows for the use, under copyright law, of their own website by someone with a screen reader?”
To state that a feature of your product is legal, and to understand the benefit that the feature would bring to users of the product, but to then allow it to be disabled arbitrarily by third parties strikes me as a company that is attempting to placate the “squeaky wheels” simply because they threaten legal action.
BookFinder.com Journal makes a comparison to the relationship between large-print books and magnifiers. Should the ability of consumers to use magnifiers while reading be controlled by the publisher (after all, it might be costing them large-print sales).
If you still feel that publishers should have the final say, then consider whether they should have this ability to control works that are in the public domain. It doesn’t matter whether it is the consumer’s right to use text-to-speech, according to this decision; it only matters that individual consumers cannot respond with the apparent impact that the Writer’s guild can muster.
There has been a similar theme in the bibliographical world lately – rules being put in place that attempt to ignore or even circumvent that which already exists, whether it is Public Domain, Fair Use, or the First Sale doctrine. OCLC, Google, and now Amazon have all implemented restrictions to their various offerings. OCLC, to their credit, has stepped back and is in the process of re-evaluating its approach towards licensing records. Google hasn’t even blinked about restricting access to Google Book items waaay beyond even the tightest of copyright interpretations. Amazon asserts the rights of users to use text-to-speech, but then allows those with a vested interest against it to control its use.
Yes, there is a pattern to all of this, and we need to figure out how to prevent it from continuing.
Media-Morphosis : How the Internet will Devour, Transform, or Destroy Your Favorite Medium is an essay by Cory Doctorow on Internet Evolution. Think of it as another way of describing the times in which we are living. Then start thinking about things that the Internet will Devour, Transform, or Destroy that aren’t “mediums”….
found via LISNews
Paper Cut : Missouri College Embraces E-Textbooks is a story that was broadcast this morning on NPR. The headline is slightly misleading, in that they are running a pilot program in which 500 students are trying out E-Texts for one semester; when the pilot is completed, they may or may not fully “embrace” the concept.
One element that I was surprised was not in the article was the idea of Open Access Texts, which are available for no cost, and are created, edited, and updated in an collaborative fashion. Perhaps they limited the pilot program to electronic versions of alredy-used textbooks, but I certainly see a progression towards open access as being a natural step for a program such as this.
It will be interesting to see what results Northwest Missouri State gets from this study.
found via LISNews
The March 2009 issue of Walt Crawford’s Cites & Insights is devoted to a 30 page essay on the Google Books settlement. His is an opinion that spans many of the issues : he is at once a writer, fair use advocate, a reader, and a library supporter.
found at Walt at Random
Gramophone Archive is the complete, searchable collection of every issue of The Gramophone since April 1923.
Enjoy audiophiles!
found via MetaFilter
The impending release of the Kindle 2 wireless reading device has been all over the news this week, accompanied by many reviews and commentaries. One response to a new feature strikes me as extreme, however:
“Some publishers and agents expressed concern over a new, experimental feature that reads text aloud with a computer-generated voice.
“They don’t have the right to read a book out loud,” said Paul Aiken, executive director of the Authors Guild. “That’s an audio right, which is derivative under copyright law.”
An Amazon spokesman noted the text-reading feature depends on text-to-speech technology, and that listeners won’t confuse it with the audiobook experience. Amazon owns Audible, a leading audiobook provider.
Source: Wall Street Journal
On one level he is correct: the audio rights, like movies and other adaptations, are derivative and subject to negotiation. However, text reading features are considered an assistive technology, and to attempt to make the output a derivative under copyright law opens a nasty can of worms.
Imagine if reading Goodnight Moon to your two-year-old was considered a “performance” and required permission… that’s how nasty and worm-ridden this can is.
One example of a negative effect of this viewpoint basically involves any website that would sell audio books, including Amazon. How would someone with a visual impairment be able to order the audio book version of a title without using a screen reader? In addition, how would they know whether a website allows for the use, under copyright law, of their own website by someone with a screen reader?
Note that we aren’t discussing audio books, which are derivative works, and are mostly very professionally produced and are meant to enhance the experience of the book, not simply to allow the person to experience it at all.
The argument by the Author’s Guild representative is a nasty legal mess that we should not consider reasonable under copyright law.
found at Open Access News
By any other name is the title of a blog post/essay by Mandy Brown which encapsulates the history of stored writing in just a few paragraphs. Take a short few moments and read it… you will be glad you did.
found via Bill at Unshelved Blog (who says his thinking about ebooks was transformed by it)
The Creative Commons blog has a thought-provoking post about CC licensed music. It seems that the latest Nine Inch Nails album, Ghost I-IV, is available under a CC license. This means that you can legally download it from any of the dozens (if not hundreds) of dowloading services on the web… for free.
However, the album is listed as the best-selling album for 2008 on Amazon.com’s MP3 store. Give that some thought, because it signals that the transition to a new business model is well under way. If that many people are paying for the download, you know many more are downloading the CC version; people are still still paying for Amazon’s download because they feel that NIN is worth it.
The music industry has been the razor’s edge of this new business model’s birth, though not without conflict. Those of us who work with books and journals should pay attention, because at some time in the not-too-distant future, our media will undergo these sorts of transformations. What do libraries need to do in order to adapt? What do we need to do in order to lead the way?
found via the Lessig blog
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.libology.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Powered by FireStats