Entries tagged with “piracy” from Tools of Change for Publishing
The Analog Hole: Another Argument Against DRM
Liza Daly
October 23, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (2)
|
Listen 
Digital rights management (DRM) might be unpopular with the public and plagued with social and technical challenges, but at least it's a guarantee that digital books can't be pirated — right?
Not so fast. Experienced computer crackers will find weaknesses in any encryption scheme, but regular folks with basic computer skills can exploit the one weakness found in all DRM'ed media: the analog hole.
What is the Analog Hole?
The "analog hole" reflects a basic principle of physics: before humans can consume any digital media, the ones and zeroes that computers understand must be converted into an analog format that our senses can perceive. For music, it's sound waves; for video and for digital books, it's patterns of light.
If you've ever visited a major metropolitan city you've probably seen the analog hole in action: street vendors selling pirated copies of popular movies, often months before they're officially released on DVD. Most of these are "cam" films, shot in real movie theaters using camcorders. Even without access to a physical copy of the film, pirates are able to capture its analog expression: the sound and pictures as perceived by a theater-goer.
In music, the analog hole is often used to get around software preventing digital copying. A user simply plays the the desired song on their computer using the legal DRM-enabled software, and records the audio coming out of their computer. Now they have a copy of the sound recording, which can be re-imported into the computer and digitally-encoded, with the original DRM stripped out. (A similar principle is at work when DRM systems go defunct and users are told to pirate their own music, although the industry uses the euphemism "making a backup.")
Film and music companies are painfully aware of the analog hole and have taken steps to close it, either by monitoring patron behavior (as in movie theaters) or by petitioning to legally limit the recording features of consumer electronics.
Because reading is a visual experience, there is the possibility of an analog hole exploit. Unlike with camcorder copies or re-burned MP3s, there is a potential for no loss in quality. And with a little ingenuity, the process can be completely automatic.
One example: Ebooks and Optical Character Recognition (OCR)
Here's a sample digital book as displayed in Adobe Digital Editions. (This book is public domain and isn't technically covered by DRM, but the principle is exactly the same.)
I hid as much of the Digital Editions menus as I could and took a screenshot of this first page of Pride and Prejudice.
Next I downloaded some free optical character recognition (OCR) software. OCR programs can "read" images and output the words in them as plain text. It's a normal part of digitization projects, in which archival printed material is first scanned and its text is automatically extracted. At the consumer level, OCR software is often bundled with commercial scanners and fax machines.
I took my screenshot and fed it to the OCR software. Here's what I got without any special fine-tuning or spell-checking. Note that all typos are from the OCR software.
Chapter 1
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession ofa large fortune must be in want of a wife, However little known the feelings or views of such a man may be on his first entering a neighbourhood, this truth is so well fixed in the minds of the surrounding families, that he is considered the rightful property of someone or other of their daughters.
"My dear Mr. Bennet," said his lady to him one day, "have you heard that Netherfield Park is let at last?"
Mr. Bennet replied that he had not.
...and on through the entire first page. This output was in HTML, ready to be posted to the Web for anyone to read.
The OCR isn't 100 percent accurate, of course, but neither are the widely-available pirated ebooks created by laborious scanning of physical books, page after page. I was also using free software that requires careful fine-tuning to get working optimally; commercial OCR software is much better, especially when combined with spell-checking.
It wouldn't be difficult to automate the process of advancing one page in Digital Editions, taking a screenshot, and passing that on to my OCR software. Once the workflow was in place, I could strip hundreds or thousands of books of their DRM in a matter of minutes.
Another Possibility: Speech Recognition
My local library is kind enough to allow me to check out digital audiobooks. Naturally they're also secured with DRM (so much so that I can't actually play them, as they require Windows Media Player and I have only Mac and Linux computers). But assuming I could play them, I'd have available to me a nice stream of professionally-produced audio.
You're using speech recognition software every time you call a customer service line and an automated voice prompts you to speak your credit card number. If that's happened to you, you also know that speech recognition isn't 100 percent accurate yet, but under certain conditions it can be quite good. Automatic speech-to-text transcription isn't nearly as far along as optical character recognition, but it's another analog hole exploit that will eventually become trivial to perform.
Does This Mean Publishers Shouldn't Produce Ebooks or Audiobooks?
No! What I hope to convey is that DRM is not a true safeguard against ebook piracy. (It is, however, a known deterrent to ebook adoption.) I've heard a lot of passing the buck on DRM: publishers claim authors want it, booksellers claim publishers insist on it. These days it's hard to find someone to publicly state that they're actually for it.
I think of DRM like this: years ago my apartment was broken into and I called a locksmith to replace the door. My landlord had authorized me to get "the best lock possible," and the locksmith obliged with a four-foot steel bolt. It was almost too heavy to turn but made a very satisfying noise when it snapped shut.
I asked the locksmith, "Is this really unbreakable?"
"The lock is, sure." He slapped the door frame. "But this is made out of wood. If I really wanted to get in I'd just kick out the door. That's why I'm honest about what I sell." When I looked puzzled he handed me his business card. It contained his name, phone number, and company slogan: "A feeling of security."
Authors and publishers should be compensated for their talent and their hard work, and the desire for DRM is understandable. Book lovers, too, want their favorite authors to succeed. But digital books are a form of technology as much as they are literature, and technologies that are successful adapt to people's needs. Is just a "feeling" of security worth the ire of good customers who want to read their books wherever and however they like?
TOC Recommended Reading
Mac Slocum
October 16, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (3)
|
Listen
In Defense of Piracy (Lawrence Lessig, Wall Street Journal)
The return of this "remix" culture could drive extraordinary economic growth, if encouraged, and properly balanced. It could return our culture to a practice that has marked every culture in human history -- save a few in the developed world for much of the 20th century -- where many create as well as consume. And it could inspire a deeper, much more meaningful practice of learning for a generation that has no time to read a book, but spends scores of hours each week listening, or watching or creating, "media."
Where is everybody? (Joe Wikert, TeleRead)
"If you build it, they will come" only works in the movies. If they really want to succeed Borders needs to do something beyond just making all this technology available in the store. Where are the in-store events (e.g., come let us help you research your family name, come see the latest e-book technologies, etc.)? How about signage in other areas of the store that promotes the tech kiosk area?
Mass book digitization: The deeper story of Google Books and the Open Content Alliance (Kalev Leetaru, First Monday)
Both projects offer the ability to search within a particular work, but only Google offers the ability to search across its entire collection. A search across the OCA archive only searches titles and description fields, not the full text of works. The OCA system thus offers a document-centric model, while Google offers both document and collection-based models, allowing broad exploratory searches of its entire holdings: the equivalent of being able to "full text search" a library. The importance of this difference cannot be understated in the limitations it places on the ability of patrons to interact with the OCA collections.
Watch the YouTube Video, Buy the Product
Mac Slocum
October 8, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (1)
|
Listen
YouTube's Content ID service, something we've covered in the past, gives publishers two options for handling unauthorized videos: the material can be removed from YouTube or it can be turned into advertising/revenue opportunities.
An article in today's New York Times shows which option Google prefers -- Content ID can now be used to associate "click-to-buy" links with video clips:
Music labels could choose to place the e-commerce links next to their own videos or on videos uploaded by users, whose images or soundtrack they identified using YouTube's Content ID system, which allows content owners to find unauthorized material on the site.
Click-to-buy links are shown below the video player on YouTube pages. It's unclear if this functionality will be integrated into videos embedded on external sites since this would require some sort of revenue share between the content owner, YouTube, the retailer and Web sites that publish embedded clips.
Links are currently limited to iTunes and Amazon products and are only viewable by U.S. visitors. YouTube says expansion plans are in the works.
MyGazines Settles With Magazine Publishers
Mac Slocum
October 3, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Mygazines, a Napster-esque magazine service, has reached a settlement with a host of magazine publishers. From Folio:
... according to a source with knowledge of the terms, confirmed later by additional court documents, Mygazines has agreed to remove all of the publishers' copyrighted content, review and screen uploads for any content not authorized by the publishers and open a channel to allow Mygazines to be notified when copyrighted content appears.
The service is still open, but Folio says many of the titles present at the site's launch are no longer available. Mygazines is promoting a vague Publisher Program that offers demographics and revenue sharing.
Piracy and Advertising: An Unlikely Union that Just Might Work
Mac Slocum
August 25, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
In a surprisingly progressive move, a number of major publishers are using YouTube's Video ID tool to monetize pirated content. The tool flags questionable material and presents copyright owners with a choice:
Copyright holders can choose what they want done with their videos: whether to block, promote, or even--if a copyright holder chooses to partner with us--create revenue from them, with minimal friction. [Emphasis added.] -- (From YouTube's Video ID about page.)
YouTube's phrasing seems overly optimistic, but the New York Times says some publishers are choosing the partnership option:
David King, a product manager at YouTube, said in an interview that 90 percent of the copyright claims made using the identification tool remain on the site and are converted to advertising inventory. The other 10 percent are either removed from the site or tracked by the content owner.
The Times article notes that at this point advertising revenue from Web video is miniscule and publishers using the tool are still skeptical. Nonetheless, it's encouraging to see a piracy approach that doesn't default to heavy-handed tactics.
News Roundup: B&N Won't Buy Borders, Kindle Roadblocks and Sightings, Pirates Convince Game Developer to Drop DRM
Mac Slocum
August 15, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Report: No Borders Bid for Barnes & Noble
It looks like Barnes & Noble won't acquire Borders after all. The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) says B&N is changing course from earlier this year and will not submit a bid for Borders.
Kindle Projections, Roadblocks and Sightings
Theresa Poletti from MarketWatch comments on the relative absence of Kindle sightings, particularly in Silicon Valley:
The biggest problem is the fact that the Kindle is only available online, via the Amazon.com Website. For many consumer electronics products, potential buyers need to touch and feel the device, to pick it up and play with it, before making any kind of purchasing commitment ... (Continue reading)
Pirates Convince Game Developer to Drop DRM
"Why do people pirate my games?"
Game developer Cliff Harris recently posed this question on his blog and the onslaught of responses caught him (and his blog host) by surprise. Harris offers some interesting conclusions, but most notable is this passage on digital rights management (DRM):
People don't like DRM, we knew that, but the extent to which DRM is turning away people who have no other complaints is possibly misunderstood. If you wanted to change ONE thing to get more pirates to buy games, scrapping DRM is it. These gamers are the low hanging fruit of this whole debate.
Harris says his company will no longer use DRM on its games.
Pirates Convince Game Developer to Drop DRM
Mac Slocum
August 14, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
"Why do people pirate my games?"
Game developer Cliff Harris recently posed this question on his blog and the onslaught of responses caught him (and his blog host) by surprise. Harris offers some interesting conclusions, but most notable is this passage on digital rights management (DRM):
People don't like DRM, we knew that, but the extent to which DRM is turning away people who have no other complaints is possibly misunderstood. If you wanted to change ONE thing to get more pirates to buy games, scrapping DRM is it. These gamers are the low hanging fruit of this whole debate.
Harris says his company will no longer use DRM on its games.
Author Paulo Coelho Illustrates the Upside of Openness
Mac Slocum
August 7, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Budding authors may not be able to duplicate the success of Paulo Coelho, but Coelho's willingness to experiment across mediums is certainly worth studying. From Jeff Jarvis' Guardian column:
Coelho is the thoroughly modern author. But he still believes in print. For him, this isn't a matter of print v digital. It's a question of what comes when you add digital to print. What does it bring him? "It gives me a lot of joy," he said, "because writing is something you do alone." He recalled the night in 2006 when he read that he had become the second best-selling author in the world. He was bursting. "My God, my wife is sleeping. How can I share this news with anybody?" Now he can shout it from the mountaintop of his blog.
Coelho's embrace of digital outlets is liberal, even by Web standards. In addition to his blogging and social media efforts, Coelho set up a site that aggregates P2P links to free (pirated) versions of his books. He briefly discusses his P2P moves in a New Statesman column:
... I knew from previous experience that the free-sharing of my book over the internet would increase its visibility, so I didn't hesitate to post it on peer-to-peer websites and on my blog.
The more I've ventured into the virtual world, the more I have realised that the internet has a logic of its own and its credo is: share everything freely.
Report: Radiohead Experiment Yields Indirect Success
Mac Slocum
August 4, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Much of the analysis around Radiohead's "pay what you like" experiment focused on the average price paid for the band's 2007 release, In Rainbows. But a new research report (PDF) from the MCPS-PRS Alliance takes a different approach:
... did the project succeed in diverting traffic away from venues where the band receives nothing, and towards a venue where it could receive something, be it the currency of cash or (at least) an email address?
Will Page and Eric Garland, the authors of the report, offer a two-part conclusion. First, luring people away from their chosen outlets is a significant challenge:
The venue hypothesis suggests that even when the price approaches zero, all other things being equal, people are more likely to act habitually (say, using The Pirate Bay) than to break their habit (say, visiting www.InRainbows.com). The implication of this 'venue hypothesis' is that if you wish the customer to deviate from his habitual action (and try a new venue), then you must offer him an improved venue, at least in his perception. [Emphasis included in report.]
Second, the massive publicity Radiohead received from the experiment likely diverted some customers from file sharing sites. In this case, "some" traffic diversion is enough to claim success:
Let's break it down real simple and treat torrent sites like a local bar, where curious consumers can enter and leave a venue of their choice anonymously, and found 'In Rainbows' to be the guest ale at the time -- and popular it was too, more popular than going anywhere else, like visiting the brewery where it originated from. Whilst the stand alone brewery did lots of new business thanks to the promotion, all the bars up and down the country did even more business. Hence the twist to our answer -- in that it is possible to redirect traffic back to your site, as well as bring new addition traffic to the torrents.
It's a murky outcome, to be sure, but Eliot Van Buskirk from Wired's Listening Post says publicity from Radiohead's experiment and the exposure In Rainbows received via official and unofficial downloads helped propel the band's traditional album and ticket sales:
All of this torrenting of In Rainbows contributed to the album making such a big impression on a listening public that's bombarded with an ever-increasing amount of information. Without its album being so widely traded, would Radiohead's album have shot to the top of the charts? Would their worldwide tour be such a smashing success? ... Not necessarily, says the report, and we agree.
Sorting through these types of reports is an arduous process because the permutations and relationships within the file sharing universe work against firm conclusions. Nonetheless, there are key takeaways:
- Page and Garland's "venue hypothesis" is worth serious consideration in any file sharing experiment. Depending on the desired outcome (i.e. general publicity vs. trackable/marketable data), going where the people already are could be smarter than luring an audience to a new destination.
- A "rising tide lifts all boats" gameplan isn't ideal, but it's suitable when you're up against an inherently murky landscape.
- Finally, the quality of the content is, and always will be, the driver of interest. Alternative distribution boosted awareness for In Rainbows, but chart success and sold out concerts were the end results of good material. Put another way: attention is most valuable when consumers bond with the content.
Opportunity Turns the Tables on Piracy
Peter Brantley
July 18, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
The Economist examines the underlying business opportunities created by piracy:
Piracy can also be a source of innovation, if someone takes a product and then modifies it in a popular way. In music unofficial remixes can boost sales of the original work. And in a recent book, "The Pirate's Dilemma", Matt Mason gives the example of Nigo, a Japanese designer who took Air Force 1 trainers made by Nike, removed the famous "swoosh" logo, applied his own designs and then sold the resulting shoes in limited editions at $300 a pair under his own label, A Bathing Ape. Instead of suing Nigo, Nike realised that he had spotted a gap in the market. It took a stake in his firm and also launched its own premium "remixes" of its trainers. Mr Mason argues that "the best way to profit from pirates is to copy them."
That this silver lining exists should not obscure the cloud. Most of the time, companies will decide to combat piracy of their products by sending in the lawyers with all guns blazing. And most of the time that is the right thing to do. But before they rush into action companies should check to see if there is a way for them to turn piracy to their advantage.
Mistake Shows Need for Clear Communication in Piracy Discussions
Mac Slocum
July 2, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (3)
|
Listen
BusinessWeek recently took a look at the new generation of Web content recognition systems, and right up front the article illustrates one of the essential problems with current piracy discussions: conclusions and misinterpretations fueled by emotion and ambiguity.
In this case, the incorrect conclusion was mine. It began with this passage:
For a media executive, the appeal of a content recognition system is clear. With a glance, a publisher or studio head can plainly see where, when, and how their content is being viewed. In a demonstration for BusinessWeek earlier this year, Attributor executives showed how many times scenes from "The Sopranos" had appeared on 20 leading video sites since they first aired on TV. In all, 1,500 scenes from 52 episodes had been viewed 32 million times. For Time Warner's (TWX) HBO, those viewings might have brought in more than $1 million, said Attributor Chief Executive Officer Jim Brock. [Emphasis added.]
The $1 million figure pushed my buttons. Brock was using piracy fears and unsubstantiated figures to further an agenda ... or so I thought. The author of the article, Peter Burrows, clarified the $1 million figure in a reply to an email I sent: It turns out that Brock was estimating revenue from advertising that did, or could have, run next to the "Sopranos" clips. I'm glad I asked, because there's a big difference between an overlooked opportunity and outright theft.
If we're talking about missed revenue from advertising rather than more inflammatory lost revenue from piracy, then we can further the discussion to advertising-based opportunities and solutions. But if a big figure is thrown out and there's no sense of where it comes from or how it applies, the discussion invariably turns emotional -- i.e. "we're losing money to pirates!", or in my case "more piracy doublespeak!" An exec informed of a $1 million missed opportunity tends to react differently than someone suffering from a $1 million theft (measured analysis vs. scorched-earth cease and desist campaigns).
This example, including the clarification, showcases the importance of clear communication when dealing with an inherently murky topic like piracy. As we've noted previously, piracy is not clear cut. It's natural to condemn the moral and financial violations of content pirates, but outright dismissal could obscure publicity or branding opportunities that yield better long-term results than Draconian countermeasures. Alternative perspectives should at least be considered before lawsuits are launched ... and you need reliable information to reach useful -- and correct -- conclusions.
Putting Ebook Piracy into Perspective
Mac Slocum
June 10, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Adam Engst from TidBits offers a comprehensive rebuttal to David Pogue's concerns about ebook piracy. Among the many notable points:
... the harder you make it for someone to buy an easily replicated digital commodity, the more likely they are to share that commodity as a way of making things easier for others. Look at the parallels in the music industry. Apple made legitimate purchases of music both easy and inexpensive via the iTunes Store, and anyone who was on the fence about whether it was acceptable to share music suddenly had a viable alternative. Providing a legitimate purchase path for electronic versions not only generates revenue, but also reduces illicit copying.
The teeth gnashing associated with publishing's transition to digital continues to obscure an important -- and simple -- point: publishing isn't the first industry to confront digital issues. Businesses in the music, film and media worlds have been tackling these concerns for years, and there are important lessons to be learned from their failures and successes.
Engst's argument about ease of use -- especially as it relates to iTunes -- deftly illustrates this. Regardless of your opinion of iTunes and Apple, it's hard to argue with the equation they've developed: make money by giving people easy access to quality digital material. This trail has already been blazed; publishers just need to pay attention.
On another topic ... Pogue's post cites two examples of scammers who, posing as blind readers, requested book PDFs and then copied them to piracy sites within 48 hours. Engst's experience with piracy is considerably different:
I have found our ebooks available for download on a handful of occasions; each time it was someone who had put the file on a server without realizing it was open to the public or who was transferring the book from work to home and had forgotten to take it down. I periodically search the file sharing services too, but it's exceedingly rare to find any of our ebooks there, and those I have seen were wildly out of date.
In short, far from the foregone conclusion that publishing an electronic book will result in rampant copying, our years of experience show just the opposite.
Engst notes that his company's subject matter (tech) and its size (small) likely minimize piracy, but there's an underlying point in this passage that's relevant on an industry-wide scale: blanket statements about the ills of piracy -- or the opportunities from piracy -- fail to recognize the nuances at play.
Whether we're discussing Pogue's run-in with "blind" con artists or Engst's limited issues with accidental piracy, it's important to remember that singular examples do not define trends (or unmask ebook cabals). Publishers need to look at ebook distribution, and the potential for piracy, on a case-by-case basis. To paraphrase Tim O'Reilly, certain titles from certain authors may benefit from increased exposure of any sort (that's the idea behind this experiment), but well-known authors with blockbuster titles might be undercut by widespread copying.
When it comes to piracy, free, and other unusual models, the only real mistake is embracing a closed-minded, all-or-nothing perspective. Doing so limits both the threats and the opportunities.
Engst's post touches on a variety of other piracy-related topics, all of which are worth considering.
Author Notes Risks and Opportunities in Free Ebooks
Mac Slocum
May 23, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (1)
|
Listen
O'Reilly author and New York Times columnist David Pogue points the way to an April post from author Steven Poole that offers an interesting look at the arguments and counter-arguments surrounding free digital books.
Last year, Poole ran his own experiment with free PDFs of his book Trigger Happy. The result: it was a "pretty good publicity stunt," but it didn't yield any notable revenue.
Although I didn't do it for the money, I was also, of course, interested in testing the idea of giving stuff away and allowing people freely to express their appreciation. So I put a PayPal button below the download. Is this, as some people say, an exciting new internet-age business model for writers and other creative types? Er, not really. The proportion of people who left a tip after downloading Trigger Happy was 1 in 1,750, or 0.057%.
Despite meager returns, Poole says the current separation between electronic and print books makes the free digital avenue wortwhile:
... the happy truth is that right now, electronic downloads don't cannibalize printed sales; if anything, they encourage them. In fact, I would gladly give away my newer book, Unspeak, in the same format right now, except that I am contractually obliged to wait until next year to do so.
But -- and this is a big but -- Poole says if/when digital delivery overtakes print as the dominant delivery mechanism, the upside of free drops precipitously:
Giving away your work in the same format in which you hope to sell it is a dangerous game, if that's how you hope to make a living.
Poole's points on both sides of the debate are well put. This is a daunting and exciting time for content creators. It's an odd period that's marked by legitmate revenue concerns as well as new opportunities to build a following. Poole's post does a nice job capturing these dueling perspectives; the entire piece is worth a read.
UPDATE: Mike Masnick at TechDirt has posted a detailed rebuttal to Pogue (and Poole) on the subject:
Just because "give it away and pray" isn't a workable business model, that doesn't mean that there aren't business models that do work. Hopefully, Poole and Pogue will eventually recognize that they're dismissing the wrong thing. They shouldn't be complaining about free (or making misleading accusations about those who simply recognize the economic forces at work) -- they should be complaining about a failure to put in place a real business model to take advantage of what will be free.
A Comeback for DRM?
Mac Slocum
May 9, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Digital rights management (DRM) discussions abated in recent months as some companies gravitated toward DRM-free formats, but the calm came to an abrupt end yesterday when David Hughes from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) predicted a comeback for DRM. From News.com:
"I think there is going to be a shift," Hughes said during the Digital Hollywood conference. "I think there will be a movement towards subscription services, and (that) will eventually mean the return of DRM."
Rebuttals have been passionate and pointed.
Hughes also blended argument and counter argument, defending DRM while echoing the rallying cry of anti-DRM advocates:
"People just want music when they want it," Hughes said. "It's about access. If they get that then they don't care about DRM."
In a broad analysis, Ars Technica discusses the discrepancy between Hughes' "access" comment and current DRM realities:
The problem with DRM is that users can't use the files how they want, which is why they do care. And we're miles away from the kind of magical solution envisioned by Hughes that would create the perfect, unnoticeable DRM scheme. [Emphasis from original post]
(Via Techdirt)
TorrentSpy Hit with $110+ Million Copyright Judgment
Mac Slocum
May 8, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Defunct BitTorrent index TorrentSpy has been ordered to pay more than $110 million in damages for copyright infringement. From News.com:
The judge ordered TorrentSpy to pay $30,000 per copyright infringement -- for 3,699 films and shows. That works out to be worth $110,970,000.
TorrentSpy shut down its site in March. Ira Rothken, TorrentSpy's attorney in the copyright suit, tells News.com the company declared bankruptcy last week, a fact he says will be lost amidst the judgment's large dollar figure:
"What is really going on here is a Hollywood public-relations stunt," Rothken said. "The reason for the size of the judgment was so a bunch of news organizations would write that 'a $100 million judgment was issued against a bunch of pirates' when, in fact, it was declared against a company with no appreciable assets that has already declared bankruptcy."
TorrentSpy plans to appeal the decision.
The judge overseeing the case ruled against TorrentSpy in December after allegations of evidence destruction surfaced. From a Dec. 2007 report:
TorrentSpy operators intentionally modified or deleted directory headings naming copyrighted titles and forum posts that explained how to find specific copyrighted works; concealed IP addresses of users; and withheld the names and addresses of forum moderators, the court found. They had earlier been fined $30,000 for violations of discovery orders and were warned of severe sanctions if they continued to ignore the orders.
These actions may have obscured the underlying legal issues in the TorrentSpy case, specifically TorrentSpy's assertion that it was a search index, not a file host. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) analyzed this angle in 2006:
... that's the important question raised by the TorrentSpy lawsuit: what's the difference between a "good" index and a "bad" index, and is that a distinction that copyright law can effectively make? In 1998, when Congress passed the DMCA's "safe harbor" provisions, it seemed to be saying that indexes should be shielded from copyright claims, so long as they implemented a "notice-and-takedown" procedure. The TorrentSpy suit (as well as the MP3Board.com lawsuit) suggests that the entertainment industry wants to renegotiate that bargain in court. The result could have important implications not just for torrent indexes, but for all online index and search services.
Early Look at HarperCollins' Social Network for Writers
Peter Brantley
May 8, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
HarperCollins' social network for burgeoning authors, Authonomy, is now in private beta. Booktwo.org provides an analysis:
The real challenge, of course, is to persuade wannabe writers to post their work at all -- in my own personal experience, unpublished writers are terrified of their work being 'stolen', enough to be suspicious of publishers themselves, let alone your average web surfer ... Authonomy’s FAQs wisely address many of these concerns ... As they put it, "if someone really wants to pass off your efforts as their own they'll probably find a way" ... Their real attitude to the problem is more sensible: "here at Authonomy, we believe that your talent is better displayed than kept hidden -- and that the chances of good things happening are more likely the more hands your manuscript passes through, and the more people you enlist in your support."
Responsibly Assuaging Author Concerns about File Sharing and "Piracy"
Andrew Savikas
April 28, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (7)
|
Listen
Eric Freeman, co-author of O'Reilly's Head First HTML with CSS & XHTML and Head First Design Patterns, recently asked via email about a rise in activity for Head First books on a popular file-sharing site. His query sparked an interesting thread on the Radar back-channel that I thought worth sharing here.
The original question (sent to Tim O'Reilly, who passed it along to the Radar list):
Tim
Any thoughts on the rise of Head First titles (mostly HFDP and HTML) on Pirate Bay? I'm trying to just take it as a sign there is strong interest in the books still ;)
Hope all is well,
Eric
First to respond was Nat Torkington, who nicely summarizes the "Piracy is Progressive Taxation" argument (emphasis added):
Fantastic! There's absolutely nothing you can do about it, and unless you see sales dipping off then I don't think there's anything you *should* do about it. The HF books work really well as books, so at best the torrents act as advertisements for the superior print product (not often you can say that with a straight face). At worst most of your downloads are going to people who wouldn't have bought the book at cover price and who will, if they enjoy it, rave about it to others.
So long as the royalty checks are strong, take BitTorrent as a sign of success rather than a problem. A wise dog doesn't let his fleas bother him.
Nikolaj Nyholm followed up referencing Make Magazine's experience:
I agree with Nat. Tim, this is your own "my problem isn’t piracy, it's obscurity." PT [Phil Torrone] has made the argument that he tracks Make popularity based on number of seeders on Pirate Bay (correct me if i'm wrong, PT). However, I'm starting to see O'Reilly books in Poland, printed in China, but with a different cover. While it's a market that you probably wouldn't reach with their current buying power, it's something I'd look into nonetheless. I'll pick up a couple of books next time I'm there and bring them next time I'm stateside.
... and then Make's own Phil Torrone weighed in (again, emphasis added):
Yup - seeing your books / magazines on Pirate Bay is always a good thing - You're current, you're interesting, if you're lucky your content transforms in to advertising for other things - for Make, the magazines become a campaign for our kits and events.
Authors are rightfully concerned to see their work pop up on peer-to-peer file sharing sites (though on occasion they're the ones who put them there), but the answer should not be to reflexively seek to stop it (you can't anyway).
Ease of Use as Anti-Piracy Tool
Mac Slocum
April 23, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Simon Juden, CEO of the Publishers Association, says uniform ebook standards -- and the resulting ease of use -- can deter piracy. From The Bookseller:
Licensing must be intuitive, simple and straightforward at the user level or the user will look for ways to circumvent them.
On a related note: Itunes, noted in the past for its ease of use, recently claimed the top spot among U.S. music retailers.
- Stay Connected
-
TOC RSS Feeds
News Posts
Commentary Posts
Combined Feed
New to RSS?
Subscribe to the TOC newsletter. 
Follow TOC on Twitter. 
Join the TOC Facebook group. 
Join the TOC LinkedIn group. 
Get the TOC Headline Widget.
- Search
-
