tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post8276718883147987659..comments2023-09-29T08:51:56.163-07:00Comments on Coyle's InFormation: Googlebooks: Innovation and the Future of the BookKaren Coylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02519757456533839003noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-42421935949212204032009-08-26T07:22:07.378-07:002009-08-26T07:22:07.378-07:00Looking at the two electronic reader platforms sta...Looking at the two electronic reader platforms starting to dominate, I can say that where I am located in Northeast Ohio makes quite a bit of difference. The Kindle is yoked to Sprint's CDMA network, making the on-board wireless functions useless outside the continental US, while Sony just announced a GSM-based phone yoked to AT&T's network which limits use outside the continental US.<br /><br />The farm I am on has coverage from neither of those carriers. The only reliable carrier on-farm is Verizon Wireless. Both devices would suffer from the slow broadband here in tethered updating from a computer.<br /><br />As for the civilizational issue, this is a fairly disturbing thing Google is pushing for. It provides advantages to urban populations to the disadvantage of all others. Since I got to the farm from Las Vegas, I've probably knocked off a novel every 2 days on average. At least physical materials are compatible with lamp light if the electricity goes out...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-24114229222708969192009-08-25T11:53:39.529-07:002009-08-25T11:53:39.529-07:00Hello, Books2sky -
Good points about the possibil...Hello, Books2sky -<br /><br />Good points about the possibilities that publishers themselves may have for in-print items. That won't satisfy the academic folks, of course, who operate often in areas where they need a mix of in-print and out-of-print items to complete their tasks. It could, however, be a boon to publishers who have the foresight to do some innovation themselves.<br /><br />You are right, the settlement itself constrains what Google can and cannot do, and shows an incredibly narrow view of the world of books and learning. <br /><br />At the same time, Google can do a lot of "background" work -- leading to ranking, grouping, suggestions... just as long as they don't mess with the text itself. The way I read the settlement, Google and the BRR will be constantly negotiating new product features. So I assume that Google will be able to present features that have $$ attached and get permission.<br /><br />What I know for sure is that academic institutions, including those who are lending their books to Google to make up the service, will not be able to use the contents of the digital copies in creative ways, not even in the ways that are allowed to Google. The "non-consumptive" research that will be allowed to the academic community, by its nature, is not going to result in new ways to consume books. Whether Google can add consumption features to its products probably depends on 1) keeping a high level of control over the output and 2) passing $$ to the BRR for the use of those features.Karen Coylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02519757456533839003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-91114941356444525282009-08-25T08:02:25.716-07:002009-08-25T08:02:25.716-07:00Hm. It's even worse than that, or better, depe...Hm. It's even worse than that, or better, depending on your point of view: Google is specifically prohibited from innovating by the terms of the Settlement. The 'Specific Prohibitions' section forbids, amongst other things, adding hyperlinks (other than in obvious situations such as existing internal and external references) and sharing user annotations. The language is aimed at constraining the presentation of in-copyright material at least to something very close to the existing 'snapshot' view of the ebook. On the upside, this means still space for publishers to add value and innovate aroung the content for which they own the rights - if we're up to the challenge.bookstotheskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15754686932358632203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-64193092405612443722009-08-25T07:54:07.104-07:002009-08-25T07:54:07.104-07:00Maybe the libraries should throw a wrench into the...Maybe the libraries should throw a wrench into the works to get Google's attention. Maybe they should just stop supplying the books to until the issues are resolved.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-34065064086082610042009-08-25T07:53:02.642-07:002009-08-25T07:53:02.642-07:00While you are not incorrect, I think the negative ...While you are not incorrect, I think the negative commentary more has to do with the vision we want to see for the future of the book.<br /><br />Do we really want the future of the book to be dominated by a single player with the keys to an infinite database of information, who can dictate charges at will.<br /><br />The entire community of libraries had a chance to step up here and fulfill their non-profit mandate. And while many did with the Open Content Alliance, the fact is too many just accepted Google's offer to do it for free to quickly.Steven Chabothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13210674330238503821noreply@blogger.com