Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Joins Yahoo! Book Search Plan
tanman writes "The BBC is reporting that Microsoft has signed on to 'work with the Open Content Alliance (OCA), set up by the Internet Archive, to initially put 150,000 works online. The move comes as Google faces growing legal pressure from publishers over its own global digital library plans.'"
...never innovate.
www.openlibrary.org is the website for content of the Open Content Alliance.
yeah yeah... sorry I should RTFM I guess... but then it just wouldn't be /. would it.
mmmmm candy corn..... pretty colors.
I couldn't fail to disagree with you any less.
The open content alliance is the answer to Google print which in large part was pushed to fruition by Yahoo! The major difference here is this plan only puts books in their index which have HAD approval by the authors/publishers. Google has said that this won't work because most of the work out there would be passed up and never get put online. For more information about Google Print check out http://print.google.com/intl/en/googleprint/about. html
At this time, Google is working with the following librarys: University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, The New York Public Library, and Oxford University.
This is obviously a MS conspiracy to "digitize" all forms of print media, thereby making paper irrelavent, and thus create a lack of work in the pulp industry, which will reduce deforrestation, and unemployed loggers will have to work in salt mines that Bil Gates owns. The miners will need to sign up on Yahoo Messenger, but they won't realize that Y! is merging protocols with MSN Messenger next year, and since they already have MSN passports they'll have duplicate identities. They'll forget to use one of the identities, so that Microsoft clones can take over their unused identity, and thuse a clone army will be born to crush Google.
And you thought it was a simple effort to make it easier to access print resources online! Ha!
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
One important fact that's overlooked, though, is that if Google has digital copies of all those pieces of works, that "digital database" could be stolen or comprimised. If that were to happen, publishers could never totally eradicate all the stolen books that would be floating around on the Internet or dark nets.
Furthermore, it's possible that technical weaknesses in Google's online book search implementation might be used to reconstruct the entire book. For example, search for what you know to be the first sentence in a book. When Google returns an excerpt with the second, third, and fourth sentence, then just do another search for the fourth sentence, and Google will return an excerpt with the fifth, sixth, seventh sentence, etc. I'm not claiming that's how Google's search feature will work; I'm merely presenting the possibility that technical weaknesses might be exploited to the detriment of the publishing industry.
This is an Opt-In system compared to googles Opt-Out deal. Google should follow MSN and Yahoo on this one. If you look at the contributors this could really go strong.
Google's service is called Google Print ( print.google.com ) and it's intended to digitize ALL available printed works. Although currently they're only doing a select few libraries.
Yahoo (and now MS it seems) is limiting it's project to digitizing works in the public domain, and works that have been authorized.
So, they've both got projects in the works, albeit with different scopes and intents.
The press has concentrated on Microsoft's joining which is fantastic, but we also had 14 key libraries join which is also great news.
http://www.opencontentalliance.org is a good site for this stuff.
Something I am jazzed about is a cool bookviewer at http://www.openlibrary.org/ showing the first books from University of California sponsored by Yahoo! and the "vision book" there tells the story of what we envision and some of the announcements.
onward!
-brewster Digital Librarian Internet Archive (administers the Open Content Alliance)
As far as I understand it, Google is merely indexing the works, so one could locate a book, and would then be able to get it from somewhere else. This (Microsoft) idea is to actually make the full texts available. Both services are useful, but they are very certainly two different services.
I like Google's version better. How do we sign on as supporters to their version of the project? Do they have something set up already for local public and school libraries to be able to use? That seems like one way that they could get a lot of endorsements and awareness from the public about what they're doing.
Abstinence is a government conspiracy. www.SafeSexZone.co
I have one simple demand. I want every single book, magazine, and recording available on the internet. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of books and periodicals that are unread and unsearchable right now because they are rotting away in some library or private collection. Human knowledge needs to be preserved and expanded. Is it unreasonable for me to be able to have access to every single textbook on C++? Forget the legal issues. We'll get some country to pass a law that it is ok to archive information like this...but it needs to be done. Too much knowledge is being lost.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Well, friend... We -are- talking about Microsoft here. I'm wondering when Yahoo will find MS's knife in its back.
Take life easy: one bit at a time.
I'm one of the software engineers who worked on the Open Library's Flipbook viewer. I just put up a blog post with further technical details on what we have done here:
u cing-open-library-and-ajax.html
http://codinginparadise.org/weblog/2005/10/introd
Check it out.
Brad Neuberg
MS will probably have a little easier time with publishers, thanks to their advocacy of DRM. It'll be interesting to see if/how the works they archive are crippled.
I saw it on Slashdot, it must be true!
The internet archive has been involved with this for more than 8 years. Amazon also has had the search inside the book for longer than Google has been running google print.
Quoted from "Microsoft to offer book search":
"Principally and philosophically, we are aligning with the notion that intellectual property should not be proprietarily owned by any commercial company," Tiedt (MSN manager) said.
Once they start putting college texts online, then we'll talk. Paying $160 for the book that you use for one semester, and getting $30 for giving it back to the school so that they can resell it again next semester for $175... Psshhtt. Let's talk searchable texts, or downloading only one chapter for a partial price. Kind of like iTunes - don't want the full cd? Buy one song. Novels? Give me the paper version any day. Of course, the sooner I go blind from staring at the beautifully unnatural glow of my computer screen, the sooner I don't have to worry about this issue anyway. How about something that gives suggestions based on what you've read? We have that for music, shouldn't be too hard for books. There are so many possibilities available to us if these things are available online. Everyone is so uptight about "rights" that they don't see what can really be done. The problem isn't the people that "steal" - it's the system that's not working. When you overcharge for something, people find other ways of getting it. They share books. They download music and movies. Instead of persecuting them, take a look at why the system is having problems, and fix that instead.
This sentence is false.
I grew up in a beach resort. You could walk into any grocery store and pick up a free booklet titled Sunny Day. There would be helpful maps, tips for tourists and cool coupons.
So was everybody walking around talking about how Sunny Day is so good for humanity and is a beacon of light in a greedy world? No. Everybody knew that Sunny Day was making money on the publication. That's why they put out the booklet. If they couldn't make money on it anymore, guess what? No more free maps. No more free coupons.
Google is just a big Sunny Day. They want to make money. They think free maps are cool, sure. But if free maps, free email, freely searchable books, free internet searching, etc. didn't contribute to advertizing dollars anymore they'd probably put those on the back burner and work on other projects that made Google richer.
MS wants more money and so does Google. Google just gives away free stuff.
It looks like another nail in the Google Print Coffin. Author's Guild and AAP both suing.
OK. They have been sued over their regular page indexing as well, but that did not end google searching. Google has the legal precedent here and seems likely to prevail.
Can we add this to the growing list of projects that Google has released that just haven't panned out, dare I say flopped? Google Search appliance, Google Web Accelerator, GTalk, Google Reader, Personalized Search, Google Ride Finder, Google Personalized Home Page, ummm... yes we can add it, Google Print. LOL.
Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Google search appliances do good business. Plenty of places buy them to index their internal networks. Gtalk? It has barely entered beta and you call it a flop? You know what? Some Parkinsons researchers I know were just commenting the other day how useful google scholar is and how they use it all the time. They had not heard of Google books yet, but all of them were interested when I mentioned it. Google has dozens of projects going, mostly just to test the waters and a lot of them end up integrated into google search. I know I use it for research. Maybe you should get a clue. These things may not be really popular, but they are profitable and useful and people use a lot of them every day. Speculating that legal action will kill a project is all well and good, but it would be even better if you had a clue about the subject or had read the laws and precedent setting cases before making said uninformed speculations.