Slashdot Mirror
The Great Library of Amazonia
theodp writes "Amazon had a dream. To bring the world a modern-day Library of Alexandria. Apparently they had a second dream. To own the patents on it. Interestingly, fears of lost cookbook and reference text sales voiced by the Author's Guild are echoed in Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos's patent application for the Suppression of features in digital images of content and a9.com CEO Udi Manber's follow up Access to electronic images of text based on user ownership of corresponding physical text, which discuss how one might block content from viewers who have no proof-of-purchase for a book on file with booksellers."
But it seems to me that if they were supressing images and images of text to people who didn't own a proof-of-purchase, it would defeat the purpose of having that information available.
Companies generally don't do things just to be evil, they do things to make money.
Design a system where honesty and ethics are rewarded big bucks, and you'll see companies fall all over themselves to be corporate saints.
I tried. The response (a good 3 years later) was:
So, like the rest of government, get a lawyer. There's no room in there for common folk.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
The library of Alexandria was so extensive (and so important) precisely because they didn't do anything like this.
Back in the day, any ship entering port at Alexandria had to declare any books, maps, written works, etc they were carrying as part the customs process. Anything that wasn't already held by the library was taken over and copied by hand, then returned.
The library also allowed others to copy works that they held.
The idea was that ships would create and add to star charts and other navigation tools that could be quickly (for the day) shared with other ships, who would then add their own observations. Everybody benefited, and the Mediterranian became a whole lot safer.
The hoarding and guarding of knowledge didn't become popular in Europe until the Age of Discovery, when nautical charts and chronometer designs were the most closely guarded state secrets.
Having all the books in one place (virtual or otherwise) certainly does make the knowledge more accessible for purchase, but locking down the contents is not quite what Alexandria was about.
Okay, I'll bite. Now this is going to sound a dumb question, but I am serious and I want a serious answer.
How, exactly, does any DRM system ever ensure that "it's the publics right being protected more than the copyright holder", given that the entire point of DRM is to prevent the public from using material in any way other than those dictated by the copyright holder?
I may not be happy in thirty years when I can't obtain a copy of a book because its out of print but still in copyright but I'm not going to hold that against the author who wasn't involved in making the law.
Really? The author signed the contract granting perpetual exclusive rights to a given publisher. Authors who know what they're doing insist on clauses that should the work go out of print, the publisher's exclusive rights become nonexclusive rights.