Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 09:46 AM

For information on Dmitry Sklyarov, who was arrested under the anti-trafficking provisions of the DMCA because (1) he wrote a program that can convert encrypted e-book files to plain PDF and (2) the company he works for, Elcomsoft, for a short time offered the program for sale to U.S. customers, click here.

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Fiolar
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 05:46 AM

As far as I am aware libraries are not free in the strict sense. They are supported at least in the UK by the rates which every householder pays to their local Council. If I want to own a book, I buy it. Other than that I am a keen supporter of library facilities and if necessary would be prepared to pay a certain amount for their upkeep rather than see them closed.

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Brendy
Date: 31 Jul 01 - 06:41 AM

I have heard it said the Dick Fosbury would be an incredibly wealthy man today, were it possible to patent a style.

Professional soccer players, are also talking about some sort of artistic control over their performances.

Let's make it so that any use of any word automatically results in a deduction from the offending speaker's bank account to the publisher who first filed claim on that word.
That's the way it looks as if it's going, alright.

Then the Bladerunners!

B

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: SeanM
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 10:45 PM

Rich, hate to say it, but if anyone besides you or "the immediate members of your household" view the pay per view, you've broken the law with a 'public viewing'.

Let's just give up. Let the publishers draft 'singers' against their will, force them to perform, and then kill them when finished (less residuals that way). Let's make it so that any use of any word automatically results in a deduction from the offending speaker's bank account to the publisher who first filed claim on that word.

M

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Deckman
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 07:16 PM

I can't help but wonder what Dale Carnegie (sp?) would say! CHEERS, BOB(deckan)NELSON

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall)
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 06:46 PM

I would think fair-use would entitle one who had purchased a book the right to lend it. What's next? If you lend a guitar to somebody whose is being repaired, can Martin Guitars sue you for cutting into a potential sale? If you order a pay-per-view concert or sporting event on cable, does the cable provider have a right to show up at your door and count heads to see how many people are watching? If you learn a tune from your fiddle teacher, must you never teach it to another fiddler?

Rich

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 04:12 PM

Right, rea. I was born in the middle of the Depression, and although we weren't destitute, money was really tight. My sisters and I had maybe half a dozen children's books, and two major purchases my Dad made was a dictionary and later a set of encyclopedia. The first "real" book I had was a copy of Treasure Island that a neighbor gave me on my ninth birthday. That was a prized possession, and I still have it. I was a voracious reader. I was able to be, because the library was free.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Jande
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 04:04 PM

I feel the need to mention here that I tend to go out and purchase books that I have originally checked out on library loan ~~when the book is so well written that I want to own it and read it over and over again~~

(That is my impulse toward music I find on the web, and also toward software. If the author is generous enough to provide a FULLY functional demo version, that is not ADware, for a limited time period, I will normally purchase that software IF it meets my needs and functions as predicted on my system.)

I'm sure I'm not alone in this. So as far as I'm concerned, the Libraries are responsible for increased sales!

~ Jande

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: rea
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 04:02 PM

I wonder if one could counter sue on the basis of classism or some such -- limiting the access of those who can't afford it. a sure way to keep the ignorant ignorant.

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 03:53 PM

Scary?

...a disturbingly high percentage of these writers react like scalded cats it you mention public libraries in their presence. Their objection? "People can check out my books and read them for free!"...

Now THAT attitude is SCARY!! Talk about the "Me Generation"!! Looks like it's not just the publishers that have the libraries in the cross hairs-

Gimmie strength, Greg

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 03:45 PM

New technologies take a while to shake out, and if there is money to be made, it can turn into a real can of worms.

My concern at this point, though, is the 3-D world bricks-and-mortar public libraries. I got my first library card when I was six years old and I've had one ever since. A lot my love of reading -- and writing -- came from hanging out in libraries when I was a kid. They were quiet and kind of holy. All that knowledge, all that information, all those wonderful adventures, just for the price of taking a book off a shelf! I've used libraries a lot. But I've also bought a lot of books. And Barbara, too. My God, the books! You can hardly see the walls for the bookshelves! So our heavy use of the library certainly doesn't mean we haven't spent a substantial portion of our incomes supporting authors and their publishers.

From a few things I've picked up from writer's magazines and at writer's conferences, some higher-ups in publishing would like to shut public libraries down. They'll use them to promote books, but they hate the idea that someone can walk in, check out a book, and read it without having to pay them some kind of royalty. At the very least, they want the libraries to charge patrons for checking out books and pay them a fee, like radio stations have to pay ASCAP or BMI for records they play.

Maybe I'm paranoid, but I think what the publishing companies really have in the cross-hairs is the public libraries themselves. If not now, then soon. Just keep watching.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: John Kidder
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 01:24 PM

Napster may be dead, but the new means of music distribution will still be the Web, at least until the next poly-connected hyperlink medium arrives (mental MIDI?).

This is the beginning of a new era in what we have always called "property". Remember that in our western system of politics there were really very few laws or customs dealling with even real hard stuff like rocks and trees until the Magna Carta in 1215 - before that everything just belonged to the King. We have had 800 years of common law developed about real property, and for the last 100 years or so we have been trying to apply the same techniques to "intellectual" property, works of art and the like.

Now we think we can copyright even little bits of software, and ideas like using rainbows in corporate logos. Hoo Ha. Copyrights in physical materials like books and tapes will soon be impossible to enforce. Check out the successors to Napster like WinMX, look at the threads all over the great MUDCAT - there is simply no way to put this genie back in the bottle.

The corporations, as always, are fighting to develop new standards, new encryption techniques, new ways to maintain their commercial power (which I'm sure we all agree has little to do with the welfare of the artists or authors). But they are behind the curve, and I suggest that they wil not catch up, any more than various kings could have re-appropriated their ownership of damn near everything.

So how do artists and authors get due reward from this new and vastly expanded market, which they should now be able to get to without the intervening distributors and middlers? Ay, there's the rub. Do we users have a kind of checkoff fee, a nickel a song or some such (that's way more than artist get now, of course)? Can we bank some form of e-credits against downloads? Maybe Mudcat would be a good forum to begin something like this - here we have a community which has a strong connetion to the shared experiences of the collective.

Anyway, just ramblin'.

johnk

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jul 01 - 12:28 PM

Greg, I pretty much agree with what you say. But the one thing that really bothers me about this is not so much the E-Book aspect, but the implication it has for libraries in general. Perhaps I was pre-set to react to this article and took a leap forward, beyond the current issue. I know a couple of successful writers (ones whose books sell consistently and who are making a good living at writing) and I have met and talked with many writers at science fiction conventions and writer's conferences. Not all, by any means, but a disturbingly high percentage of these writers react like scalded cats it you mention public libraries in their presence. Their objection? "People can check out my books and read them for free! Every time someone checks out a book, that's one I don't get paid for." And if some authors feel that way, what do you think the publishers might be thinking?

Now that the recording industry has pretty much unhorsed Napster, the publishing industry is following their example by going after ways of distributing books, especially ways that don't run a book through the cash-register as many times as possible. The issue is not the welfare of the author (although they will give lip-service to this), it is maximizing their own profits.

Perhaps I should have titled this thread "Napster's dead. Who's next afterwho's next?" The current target is E-Books. It would not surprise me in the least if the next target is libraries themselves.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Brendy
Date: 29 Jul 01 - 10:27 PM

Controlling the information, eh?

Look out for the Bladerunners, next.

B.

Subject: RE: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jul 01 - 09:42 PM

What makes me nervous is that the sole purpose of the E-Book scam is to screw more money out of the consumer- as with music CD's the production costs for publishers will go way down, the price of the product will go up, the life span of the product will be less (yes, CD's degrade faster than vinyl and/or paper)so sales will increase over time and most authors will continue to receive relatively small sums for their efforts. As the article points out, with the new format costs to libraries- most already way underfunded- to simply stay even will increase. Ditto school libraries, which have virtually no funds at all. How many folks on low and moderate incomes will be able to shell out for an E-Book reader or computer? Who comes out ahead in all this? Only the publishers- and the computer manufacturers, perhaps- what better way to boost lagging PC sales?
If you want to worry about a conspiracy, THAT'S the one to be concerned about.

Subject: Copyright: Napster is dead. Who's next?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Jul 01 - 08:55 PM

My wife, Barbara, works at the Seattle Public Library. She received this in her e-mail at work. Does this make anybody nervous besides me?

Don Firth

Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:41:55
From: Michael Harkovitch
To: Seattle Public Library—All Staff
Subject: Librarians targeted in latest copyright battles

Librarians Targeted In Latest Copyright Battles
By Lisa Bowman, ZDNet News

Now that the high-stakes battle over copyrights has moved beyond music and movies to books, librarians are finding themselves the subject of rhetoric usually reserved for terrorists or revolutionaries.

Gone are the days when a librarian's worst offense was hushing patrons one too many times.

In this digital age, the custodians of published works are at the center of a global copyright controversy that casts them as villains simply for doing their job: letting people borrow books for free.

Their leading opponents are the very people who supply the books that fill their shelves--the publishers. And now that the high-stakes battle over copyrights has moved beyond music and movies to books, librarians are finding themselves the subject of rhetoric usually reserved for terrorists or revolutionaries.

"They've got their radical factions, like the Ruby Ridge or Waco types," who want to share all content for free, said Judith Platt, a spokeswoman for the Association of American Publishers.

After winning a series of court battles, emboldened copyright owners are turning to new fronts in the campaign to retain control of their work in the wilds of the Internet. Publishing houses that had ringside seats to the Napsterization of the music industry are increasingly concerned that their material, too, may be freely swapped in digital form. As a result, their primary target is the most obvious place to get free books: the public library.

Their efforts anger many of those who have made it their mission to support and work in libraries, traditionally the defenders of public access to information and the promoters of literacy.

"We are not the enemy," said Miriam M. Nisbet, legislative counsel for the American Library Association's (ALA's) office of government relations. She pointed out that libraries have always fostered a love of reading that encourages people to purchase books.

Still, Nisbet acknowledged that libraries and copyright holders will find themselves increasingly at odds as technology continues to ease the digital transmission of published works.

"The mission of libraries is to ensure access," she said. "The nature of copyright is to restrict access. There's a real tension there."

Lessons from Napster

Even file-swapping service Napster is weighing in on the issue. Company CEO Hank Barry--who has lined up a diverse cast of supporters including singers, hackers and even doctors--is portraying librarians as allies in his fight to promote free file trading.

Barry painted himself as a kindred spirit of the ALA at its annual meeting in San Francisco last month. The woes of Napster, which is all but shut down after a protracted legal assault by the music industry, are only the beginning of the content crackdown, he told the group.

"Copyright absolutists," he said, are hoping to restrict all access to information--not just through commercial companies such as Napster but through seemingly innocuous systems such as those found at the local library.

Copyright holders worry that easy and free access to digital books and journals will tempt people into replicating these publications, depriving writers and publishers of payment as their work circulates through the Web or a library network. They also fear that a new digital lending system allowing unlimited access to books--as opposed to letting patrons check them out one at a time--would further sap their potential income.

After all, they argue, the publishing sector watched the music industry lose virtually all control over its digital material as Napster and other free sharing services allowed music files to be zipped from one person to the next with no tolls paid to copyright owners.

"If digital piracy hits written content in the way it hit recorded content, the results will overwhelm everyone--librarians, authors, publishers, readers," said the publishers association's Platt. On the other side, librarians fear that copyright holders will use new technologies to overstep the boundaries of fair use, allowing publishers to exert control over their works from the time they roll off the printing presses to well after libraries have bought them for their collections.

Once books are available in digital form, for example, publishers may begin usage policies enforced through technology, such as erasing a book or journal article after a certain number of people have read it, librarians say.

What's more, as a rising number of copyright owners and software developers turn to licensing models, librarians worry that they'll be forced to pay perpetual rent on a product or lose the work--a possibility that could endanger the important archival role of their institutions.

"If I buy a book, take care of it, and nobody rips it off, I'll still have it 500 years from now," said Jim Neal, dean of libraries at Johns Hopkins University. "But if I buy an electronic book and don't keep paying for it, it's gone."

While acknowledging that such worries represent worst-case scenarios, librarians are also quick to point out that it's important to consider the consequences of standing by and letting copyright owners have their way. Already, laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act have given copyright holders unprecedented control over their products.

In rallying against that legislation, librarians argued that it could outlaw things we take for granted now, such as the ability to link to some Web sites or to make a copy of a work you own for personal use--fears justified by cases such as DeCSS and Napster.

"Information equalizers"

Librarians also are upset because they see themselves as information equalizers, providing free access to books, magazines and music for people and neighborhoods that otherwise couldn't afford it. As copyright holders try to attach digital price tags to every use of every work, some librarians worry the divide between the "haves" and "have nots" will widen.

Some technology companies, with names such as NetLibrary and Ebrary, hope to balance the desires of all parties.

Headed by Christopher Warnock, son of Adobe Systems Chairman John Warnock, Ebrary is a sort of digital rights management system for published material. It takes digital publications in PDF format and displays them freely on the Web, through either the Ebrary site or a partner site run by a publisher, library or research group.

Warnock said publishers have been receptive to the technology because people must still pay to copy or print a document--and even then, they can't replicate the entire work.

"The experience we want to recreate is being able to walk into a bookstore or library and pick up a book and look through it," he said.

Ebrary goes a step further than just compiling digital works, allowing people to search across collections. For example, entering a search term into the Ebrary database yields snippets from multiple books on that topic.

At their annual meeting, however, many librarians remained skeptical when Warnock showed them the product, which is scheduled for release in a few weeks. On one hand, they like the free access; on the other, they can't claim the ownership of Ebrary's database of books and journals that they can after buying them in paper form, thereby making archiving impossible.

"Libraries have mixed emotions about us because they don't know what to make of us," Warnock said. As long as the issue of copyrights remains so volatile, that kind of skepticism isn't likely to fade anytime soon.

"I don't see the doomsday of libraries not existing," said Wayne Overbeck, a professor of communications at California State University at Fullerton, who's been closely watching the digital copyright debates. "But I do see libraries having a smaller collection. It's going to cost a lot more money than ever for libraries to be up to date."