Ed Pilkington, Guardian; Stephen Covey's digital rights deal with Amazon startle New York publishers:
"The scramble for survival in the New York publishing world provoked by the rise of the ebook has become so ruthless it makes the Wild West look like a Swiss finishing school. Authors and publishers are squabbling over rights, internet retailers are slugging it out with bookshops, and tech companies are climbing over each other to produce an ebook reader that can challenge Amazon's hit, the Kindle.
The latest blast of gunfire has come from one of America's leading authors in the highly lucrative market of business self-help books.
Stephen Covey has announced he is selling exclusive digital rights to two of his bestsellers – The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, and Principle-Centered Leadership – to Amazon, bypassing the traditional publisher, Simon & Schuster, that has up to now handled all his output.
The move has put a chill over New York publishing houses already struggling to keep up with the ebook revolution. One of their big fears is that of becoming separated from their backlists, the titles that act as the cash cows of the industry, bringing in a steady and increasingly crucial income in the insecure digital world.
As jitters spread, some big publishers have moved to defend what they claim is theirs – the digital rights to the backlist.
Random House startled many in the book world this week by sending a letter to agents informing them that, in its view, the publishing house holds the exclusive rights to digital editions of the "vast majority" of its backlist titles. That made authors and their agents see red. They pointed to a ruling by the New York courts as far back as 2002 in which Random House itself failed in an attempt to block on ebook firm from publishing works by the late William Styron, author of Sophie's Choice, and Kurt Vonnegut. The ruling, upheld on appeal, found that copyright for books that were written before digital publishing existed, remained with the author.
Arthur Klebanoff, head of RosettaBooks, the ebook company that beat off Random House in 2002, secured Covey's exclusive deal this week with Amazon. He said: "We are very clear about this, the author controls the rights unless it is specified otherwise, and that was settled by the courts years ago...
The spat in the US stands in contrast to Britain, where publishers broadly accept that they do not have the rights to the ebook editions of older titles, and authors accept that they should avoid offering ebooks to other publishers.
"There is a kind of gentleman's agreement," said Anthony Goff, an agent with David Higham, who heads the trade association for literary agents in the UK...
As these behemoths fight it out in an increasingly ungainly display of muscle, the big question is what happens to authors and their readers, which is after all what the fuss is about.
Bestselling names such as Covey are likely to prosper, as will their fans who will benefit from knockdown prices. Amazon is selling some titles for as little as $7.99, massively below their paper price.
Less well-known authors have yet to reap any rewards."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/dec/15/stephen-covey-amazon-ebook-deal
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
US government looks to expand scientific open access policy; Ars Technica, 12/14/09
John Timmer, Ars Technica; US government looks to expand scientific open access policy:
The US government's Office of Science and Technology Policy is hosting a forum for debating an expansion of an open access policy, used by the National Institute of Health, that guarantees all publications derived from the agency's funding are available to the public within one year.
"Last Thursday, the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy launched a public forum to allow the public to provide feedback into a potential expansion of the US government's open access policy for scientific research. Right now, the National Institutes of Health is the only agency that requires recipients of its funding to make any scientific papers available to the public within a year of the publication date. For the next month, the OSTP will be soliciting feedback on whether and how the policy should be extended to other federal agencies...
One problem with the documents at the website is that they don't make a clear distinction between the publications that are based on research funded by federal agencies and the data behind the research itself. A more informative description of the different materials can be found in the Federal Register, which published the official request for input...
So, for the moment at least, the OSTP is focusing strictly on publications, and not on providing access to the raw data produced during the course of these studies (although that may be subject to separate disclosure policies, depending on the agency and material). It's a rather significant distinction to make, given the recent controversy over the availability of climate data that was used to produce several peer-reviewed studies.
In any case, the actual format of the material may ultimately be just as important as which agencies are included. The ability to ingest data from these publications and make it accessible to text mining and meta-analysis that crosses disciplines has the potential to open new avenues for research and provide a higher scientific return on the public's investment."
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/12/us-government-looks-to-expand-scientific-open-access-policy.ars
The US government's Office of Science and Technology Policy is hosting a forum for debating an expansion of an open access policy, used by the National Institute of Health, that guarantees all publications derived from the agency's funding are available to the public within one year.
"Last Thursday, the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy launched a public forum to allow the public to provide feedback into a potential expansion of the US government's open access policy for scientific research. Right now, the National Institutes of Health is the only agency that requires recipients of its funding to make any scientific papers available to the public within a year of the publication date. For the next month, the OSTP will be soliciting feedback on whether and how the policy should be extended to other federal agencies...
One problem with the documents at the website is that they don't make a clear distinction between the publications that are based on research funded by federal agencies and the data behind the research itself. A more informative description of the different materials can be found in the Federal Register, which published the official request for input...
So, for the moment at least, the OSTP is focusing strictly on publications, and not on providing access to the raw data produced during the course of these studies (although that may be subject to separate disclosure policies, depending on the agency and material). It's a rather significant distinction to make, given the recent controversy over the availability of climate data that was used to produce several peer-reviewed studies.
In any case, the actual format of the material may ultimately be just as important as which agencies are included. The ability to ingest data from these publications and make it accessible to text mining and meta-analysis that crosses disciplines has the potential to open new avenues for research and provide a higher scientific return on the public's investment."
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/12/us-government-looks-to-expand-scientific-open-access-policy.ars
Victoria Espinel Confirmed as U.S. Copyright Czar; Media Week, 12/4/09
Georg Szalai, Media Week, Victoria Espinel Confirmed as U.S. Copyright Czar:
"Industry representatives on Friday hailed a Thursday evening Senate vote that confirmed Victoria Espinel as the nation's first Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.
But they also called on Washington to help ensure her success in fighting intellectual property theft as President Obama's copyright czar.
"Intellectual property industries are an essential economic engine to the U.S. economy, and it is critical that the new IP Enforcement Coordinator now be given adequate resources to carry out her new responsibilities," said MPAA chairman and CEO Dan Glickman.
He lauded Espinel as "a capable and experienced advocate for the artists and creators." She is a former assistant U.S. trade representative for intellectual property and innovation who also previously worked with the chief U.S. trade negotiator on IP issues before the World Trade Organization.
In a U.S. Chamber of Commerce blog post Friday, Rick Cotton, executive vp and general counsel at NBC Universal, also expressed hopes that the new top government post will have a big impact.
"Let's hope that today represents the high-water mark of IP theft," he said. Espinel's confirmation as the first IPEC "should help to see the tide begin to recede under the pressure of the Obama administration's commitment to protecting IP, producing new jobs and new industries that will benefit the nation for decades to come.""
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/content_display/news/digital-downloads/broadband/e3i6b9aa596485fe24d89a9b45a4ad30a7f
"Industry representatives on Friday hailed a Thursday evening Senate vote that confirmed Victoria Espinel as the nation's first Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.
But they also called on Washington to help ensure her success in fighting intellectual property theft as President Obama's copyright czar.
"Intellectual property industries are an essential economic engine to the U.S. economy, and it is critical that the new IP Enforcement Coordinator now be given adequate resources to carry out her new responsibilities," said MPAA chairman and CEO Dan Glickman.
He lauded Espinel as "a capable and experienced advocate for the artists and creators." She is a former assistant U.S. trade representative for intellectual property and innovation who also previously worked with the chief U.S. trade negotiator on IP issues before the World Trade Organization.
In a U.S. Chamber of Commerce blog post Friday, Rick Cotton, executive vp and general counsel at NBC Universal, also expressed hopes that the new top government post will have a big impact.
"Let's hope that today represents the high-water mark of IP theft," he said. Espinel's confirmation as the first IPEC "should help to see the tide begin to recede under the pressure of the Obama administration's commitment to protecting IP, producing new jobs and new industries that will benefit the nation for decades to come.""
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/content_display/news/digital-downloads/broadband/e3i6b9aa596485fe24d89a9b45a4ad30a7f
Supplemental Notification of Authors and Publishers About Google Book Search Settlement Begins Today; PR Newswire, 12/14/09
PR Newswire, Supplemental Notification of Authors and Publishers About Google Book Search Settlement Begins Today:
"Distribution of the Supplemental Notice in the Google Book Search Settlement is now taking place. The Supplemental Notice summarizes the principal changes from the Original Settlement to the Amended Settlement. The Court overseeing the case preliminarily approved the Amended Settlement, and approved the Supplemental Notice, on November 19, 2009.
Please visit http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/ for detailed information, including the Supplemental Notice and revised key dates. The website is available in 36 languages.
The Court will hold a hearing on whether to grant final approval of the Amended Settlement on February 18, 2010.
SOURCE Google Book Search Settlement Administrator"
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/supplemental-notification-of-authors-and-publishers-about-google-book-search-settlement-begins-today-79212967.html
"Distribution of the Supplemental Notice in the Google Book Search Settlement is now taking place. The Supplemental Notice summarizes the principal changes from the Original Settlement to the Amended Settlement. The Court overseeing the case preliminarily approved the Amended Settlement, and approved the Supplemental Notice, on November 19, 2009.
Please visit http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/ for detailed information, including the Supplemental Notice and revised key dates. The website is available in 36 languages.
The Court will hold a hearing on whether to grant final approval of the Amended Settlement on February 18, 2010.
SOURCE Google Book Search Settlement Administrator"
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/supplemental-notification-of-authors-and-publishers-about-google-book-search-settlement-begins-today-79212967.html
Nicolas Sarkozy fights Google over classic books; Telegraph, 12/14/09
Henry Samuel, Telegraph; Nicolas Sarkozy fights Google over classic books:
Nicolas Sarkozy has vowed to keep Google's hands off France's classic books and national treasures by spending £680 million making them available on the internet.
"The French president made the announcement amid a row between the internet giant and publishers, who claim Google has breached their copyright by scanning books for its online library Google Books.
Mr Sarkozy said the sum would go towards the "digitisation of the content of our museums, our libraries and our cinematographic heritage".
He added: "There is no question of letting this heritage go."
The package was part of his government's "grand loan" – a £31 billion spending spree he detailed on Monday aimed at boosting France's economic growth and competitiveness.
The pledge followed Mr Sarkozy's warning last week that he would not allow Google to carry out a massive literary land grab on French and other European literature.
"We are not going to be stripped of our heritage for the benefit of a big company, no matter how friendly, big or American it is," he said.
"We are not going to be deprived of what generations and generations have produced in the French language just because we weren't capable of funding our own digitisation project."
Jean-Noël Jeanneney, a former chief of the national library recently warned recently that the French Revolution risked being given an "Anglo-Saxon" slant if Google prevailed – one in which "valiant British aristocrats triumphed over bloodthirsty Jacobins and the guillotine blotted out the rights of man."
Google, based in California, recently unveiled plans recently to scan books and make them digitally searchable online. It argues almost all the books digitised are in the public domain and that it will pay copyright on any still in private hands.
The Paris publishing group, La Martinière, took Google to court after it discovered the firm had scanned and archived books on which La Martinière holds the copyright. A ruling is expected on Friday. Seuil has also sued Google for copyright breach.
Marissa Maya, Google's number three last week last week denied stealing French heritage. "I think our service is very poorly understood," she said.
"The advantage of this work is precisely to conserve literature and allow people to access it. Right now we're simply the most advanced company in this area." In his speech at the Elysée yesterday, Mr Sarkozy said that public groups like Google could be part of the venture but the state would be very much in charge.
The money is expected to go to boosting Gallica, France's own book-scanning project, which is linked to Europeana, the EU's digital library."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/6811462/Sarkozy-fights-Google-over-classic-books.html
Nicolas Sarkozy has vowed to keep Google's hands off France's classic books and national treasures by spending £680 million making them available on the internet.
"The French president made the announcement amid a row between the internet giant and publishers, who claim Google has breached their copyright by scanning books for its online library Google Books.
Mr Sarkozy said the sum would go towards the "digitisation of the content of our museums, our libraries and our cinematographic heritage".
He added: "There is no question of letting this heritage go."
The package was part of his government's "grand loan" – a £31 billion spending spree he detailed on Monday aimed at boosting France's economic growth and competitiveness.
The pledge followed Mr Sarkozy's warning last week that he would not allow Google to carry out a massive literary land grab on French and other European literature.
"We are not going to be stripped of our heritage for the benefit of a big company, no matter how friendly, big or American it is," he said.
"We are not going to be deprived of what generations and generations have produced in the French language just because we weren't capable of funding our own digitisation project."
Jean-Noël Jeanneney, a former chief of the national library recently warned recently that the French Revolution risked being given an "Anglo-Saxon" slant if Google prevailed – one in which "valiant British aristocrats triumphed over bloodthirsty Jacobins and the guillotine blotted out the rights of man."
Google, based in California, recently unveiled plans recently to scan books and make them digitally searchable online. It argues almost all the books digitised are in the public domain and that it will pay copyright on any still in private hands.
The Paris publishing group, La Martinière, took Google to court after it discovered the firm had scanned and archived books on which La Martinière holds the copyright. A ruling is expected on Friday. Seuil has also sued Google for copyright breach.
Marissa Maya, Google's number three last week last week denied stealing French heritage. "I think our service is very poorly understood," she said.
"The advantage of this work is precisely to conserve literature and allow people to access it. Right now we're simply the most advanced company in this area." In his speech at the Elysée yesterday, Mr Sarkozy said that public groups like Google could be part of the venture but the state would be very much in charge.
The money is expected to go to boosting Gallica, France's own book-scanning project, which is linked to Europeana, the EU's digital library."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/6811462/Sarkozy-fights-Google-over-classic-books.html
Monday, December 14, 2009
Stanford Dissertations Moving from ProQuest to Google - An interview with Mimi Calter; Stanford University Libraries, 11/20/09
Mary Minow [Executive Editor of the Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Website], via Stanford University Libraries; Stanford Dissertations Moving from ProQuest to Google - An interview with Mimi Calter [Assistant University Librarian & Chief of Staff for Stanford University Libraries & Academic Information Resources]:
"Minow: Stanford is partnering with Google to make student dissertations available worldwide. What does Google bring to the table that simply using the Stanford Digital Repository on its own does not?
Calter: Google provides broad distribution. We'll be using the Stanford Digital Repository for preservation, and we'll be making the dissertations available through our online catalog, but working with Google dramatically increases the visibility of the materials. We think that visibility is an advantage for our students.
In the long run, we hope that other schools will join us in contributing their dissertations to Google, and that "Google Dissertations" will become the go-to resource for dissertations, theses and similar materials.
Minow: What is Stanford's policy on copyright and student dissertations? Are students required to give permission to the University to copy and distribute their dissertations?
Calter: Per Section 5.2 of the Research Policy Handbook (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DoR/rph/5-2.html), Stanford's students retain copyright in works they create as part of their coursework, including dissertations. Therefore, Stanford does need the students' permission to preserve and distribute those dissertations. As part of the standard submission process, students grant Stanford a license to do so. It is a license only, and students retain full copyright in their work.
The submission process also allows students to apply a Creative Commons license to their work. We hope that this addition will raise awareness of the Creative Commons option, and further increase the accessibility of these materials.
Minow: I understand that this move away from ProQuest means that Stanford student work will no longer be included in Dissertation Abstracts unless the student makes an affirmative effort to submit to ProQuest. What are the implications for the broader research world of such a step?
Calter: It is a concern, but our sense is that the wide availability and visibility of the dissertations through the Stanford catalog and Google will more than compensate for the lack of a listing in Dissertation Abstracts.
Minow: Google has been harvesting electronic dissertations for several years. How does Stanford's submission of the dissertations differ from Google's past practices?
Calter: The submission process that Stanford is using is similar to the one that publishers are using for Google Book Search. So we'll be submitting metadata along with the dissertation files, and expect to have more descriptive listings than just titles."
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/commentary_and_analysis/2009_11_calter.html
"Minow: Stanford is partnering with Google to make student dissertations available worldwide. What does Google bring to the table that simply using the Stanford Digital Repository on its own does not?
Calter: Google provides broad distribution. We'll be using the Stanford Digital Repository for preservation, and we'll be making the dissertations available through our online catalog, but working with Google dramatically increases the visibility of the materials. We think that visibility is an advantage for our students.
In the long run, we hope that other schools will join us in contributing their dissertations to Google, and that "Google Dissertations" will become the go-to resource for dissertations, theses and similar materials.
Minow: What is Stanford's policy on copyright and student dissertations? Are students required to give permission to the University to copy and distribute their dissertations?
Calter: Per Section 5.2 of the Research Policy Handbook (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DoR/rph/5-2.html), Stanford's students retain copyright in works they create as part of their coursework, including dissertations. Therefore, Stanford does need the students' permission to preserve and distribute those dissertations. As part of the standard submission process, students grant Stanford a license to do so. It is a license only, and students retain full copyright in their work.
The submission process also allows students to apply a Creative Commons license to their work. We hope that this addition will raise awareness of the Creative Commons option, and further increase the accessibility of these materials.
Minow: I understand that this move away from ProQuest means that Stanford student work will no longer be included in Dissertation Abstracts unless the student makes an affirmative effort to submit to ProQuest. What are the implications for the broader research world of such a step?
Calter: It is a concern, but our sense is that the wide availability and visibility of the dissertations through the Stanford catalog and Google will more than compensate for the lack of a listing in Dissertation Abstracts.
Minow: Google has been harvesting electronic dissertations for several years. How does Stanford's submission of the dissertations differ from Google's past practices?
Calter: The submission process that Stanford is using is similar to the one that publishers are using for Google Book Search. So we'll be submitting metadata along with the dissertation files, and expect to have more descriptive listings than just titles."
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/commentary_and_analysis/2009_11_calter.html
Public Knowledge Announces First Annual World's Fair Use Day (WFUD); Public Knowledge, 12/9/09
Mehan Jayasuriya, Public Knowledge; Public Knowledge Announces First Annual World's Fair Use Day (WFUD):
"We at Public Knowledge are thrilled to announce the first annual World's Fair Use Day (WFUD), a day-long celebration of creativity, innovation and remix culture to be held at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. on January 12th, 2010. Fair use is the legal right that allows creators to make limited uses of copyrighted materials for purposes like comment, criticism and education. At World's Fair Use Day, we'll demonstrate how fair uses of existing works, ranging from recontextualized audio mashups to documentary films, enrich our culture and contribute to the ongoing dialog on copyright. Speakers at the event will include Ben Huh (CEO of the Cheezburger Network, the publishing company behind ICanHasCheezburger and FailBlog), Dan Walsh (creator of the web comic "Garfield Minus Garfield"), Pennsylvania Congressman and mashup fan Mike Doyle, TechDirt founder Mike Masnick, mashup artist DJ Earworm and many more. The night before the main event, we'll kick things off with a "Movie Night," hosted by Mark Hosler of the pioneering audio collage band Negativland and featuring Brett Gaylor, director of RIP: A Remix Manifesto and Kembrew McLeod, director of Copyright Criminals. To view the full list of speakers and schedule and to RSVP, visit wfud.info."
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/2806
"We at Public Knowledge are thrilled to announce the first annual World's Fair Use Day (WFUD), a day-long celebration of creativity, innovation and remix culture to be held at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. on January 12th, 2010. Fair use is the legal right that allows creators to make limited uses of copyrighted materials for purposes like comment, criticism and education. At World's Fair Use Day, we'll demonstrate how fair uses of existing works, ranging from recontextualized audio mashups to documentary films, enrich our culture and contribute to the ongoing dialog on copyright. Speakers at the event will include Ben Huh (CEO of the Cheezburger Network, the publishing company behind ICanHasCheezburger and FailBlog), Dan Walsh (creator of the web comic "Garfield Minus Garfield"), Pennsylvania Congressman and mashup fan Mike Doyle, TechDirt founder Mike Masnick, mashup artist DJ Earworm and many more. The night before the main event, we'll kick things off with a "Movie Night," hosted by Mark Hosler of the pioneering audio collage band Negativland and featuring Brett Gaylor, director of RIP: A Remix Manifesto and Kembrew McLeod, director of Copyright Criminals. To view the full list of speakers and schedule and to RSVP, visit wfud.info."
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/2806
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)