"Security Engineering" Is Now Online

An anonymous reader writes "Ross Anderson, author of 'Security Engineering', notifies in a message to comp.risks that he just got permission from Wiley to let anyone download the full content of his book for free. This is one of the best books on computer security and it is used as textbook in many University courses (I teach two of them)."

Comments

Backwards System

[eldavojohn]

The publishers thought for years that it was too risky to let authors put books online but they are gradually learning that this isn't so. Putting a book online often increases its sales; more people read it and those who find it useful often go buy a copy.

Funny how that works with media, isn't it? Newspapers are free to read on-line. Do they blame lack of income on that? Hell no, they probably make more money on ads that didn't cost ink and paper to print!

If we were concerned about artists, you'd put all their music online--eliminating album profits to them and labels--and pay to see the live shows. That's where they make all their money anyway.

Poor tech authors often sign anything that's in front of them to get their books out. Which means they don't make squat on the sales plus the publisher hikes the price up so that they turn a good profit. Ever bought Duda, Hart & Stork's Pattern Classification? Good luck, $100 for a six year old book!? Give me the black and white Asian release that's illegally sold on eBay for $10. Yet it remains a standard in the field.

You don't believe me that authors sign outrageous contracts? Well, this poor man had to beg to get his work online. Sounds like he didn't sign a contract that left him creative and absolute control over the distribution of this work.

Yet if they don't get it into print, it can't be used in a classroom setting. What a terrible system (hail capitalism). To all artists, authors and producers of media, please cut out the middle men that make it nearly impossible for me to afford your beautiful works and more or less cheat you out of money in a highway robbery-like scam.

Printed word was an amazing invention because it posed a method to mechanically copy texts and ideas and get them out to people. The internet allows you to do that for nearly free ... use it!

Re:Backwards System

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet if they don't get it into print, it can't be used in a classroom setting.

Fortunately, this isn't always true! While taking my advanced operating systems course, we used Linux Device Drivers which is available online for free. This is also the case with my Programming Languages class where we learned and wrote an interpreter for Scheme. Then, in my computers and society class we used ESR's writings and Stallman's biography.

Maybe more topics could be covered in free format... Seems to me like Google is making life easier for some English courses and MIT already has opencourseware up and running.

Guess I went off on a tangent over one little line... :)

Re:Backwards System

[Red Flayer]

Sounds like he didn't sign a contract that left him creative and absolute control over the distribution of this work.

Who woulda thunk it... he signs a contract to get a company to publish and distribute his work, and doesn't retain absolute control? If he wanted complete control, he would have self-published. There are pros and cons of both, and to rip the publishing industry for a perfectly reasonable contract term is ridiculous. As self-publishing becomes more and more feasible given the internet, these restrictions will change. This is a sign of that change, and you should celebrate Wiley rather than lambast them.

Yet if they don't get it into print, it can't be used in a classroom setting. What a terrible system (hail capitalism).

What an imbecilic troll. The problem isn't capitalism, it's the inherent nature of a bureaucratic system -- it's resistant to change (for good reason -- there are lots of crappy ideas out there). This depends not at all on what kind of socioeconomic system is in place, and capitalism may indeed offer better opportunities for authors (do you think an autocratic economic system would enhance the ability of authors to get their material accepted in the classroom?).

Please note, I am not a free market idealist. I am also not an apologist for the publishing industry, and their treatment of authors. However, you severely misrepresent the fact that publishers such as Wiley do indeed provide services to authors, and to the public. (Editing, fact-checking, vetting, advertising, marketing, etc).

Disclaimer: I work in magazine publishing, which is an entirely different kettle of fish. I do, however, deal with book authors on a frequent basis, both self-published and thos epublished by major imprints.

Re:Backwards System

[muellerr1]

I've got a friend who used to work for a small boutique publisher, and I can tell you that publishers are an author's best friend. Without them the author's works would go nowhere. Fine, change the business model to distribute freely online, but as far as increasing sales of books, those books have to fome from somewhere.

I just don't get the 'cut the middleman' mentality. What exactly do you think the publishers aren't contributing that the authors could do themselves? Are you expecting authors to employ and manage editors, designers, printers, pr and marketing people, advertisers, a nation-wide system of sales reps, sales managers, shipping companies, and so on? Or are you suggesting that these roles aren't necessary? That's the same thing as saying that books should only be digital from here on out. The attitide that the authors should 'just get a loan' to fund these activities is hogwash since the only people who could get a loan of that magnitude for an unpublished manuscript are already established authors, and even then it would be iffy. Then people suggest that authors should just publish online and screw printed materials, but for most applications like textbooks that doesn't really work for the consumer--wouldn't you rather just have a book than having to print it out yourself, which could easily cost as much in ink and paper as a bound book would, while being more irritating? Also, e-book technology still sucks. Besides, the author would still need to employ the editing, pr, marketing & advertising people anyway, because if you don't know about a book, why would you buy it? The fact is, people happily pay for advertising because the return on investment is huge.

Wouldn't it be great if there was a company that had the capital to invest like a bank, but also the expertise to cull the few good manuscripts from the staggering pile of crappy ones, then print and market and distribute these works? Wait, that would be a publisher.

I acknowledge that in some specific cases self-publishing directly to the internet might be a good business plan. But to suggest that we abandon dead trees in most cases misunderstands the market. You said it yourself, "...if they don't get it into print, it can't be used in a classroom setting." Sure, good chunks of fat could be trimmed from the publishing world, but name one industry where this isn't true? I just think that the 'middle man' is necessary to the process.

Sorry, OP. I realize that most of my rant doesn't even apply to your main points. I just don't think the middle man is all that useless in most cases.

Re:Backwards System

[hal9000(jr)]

Dunno about Wiley, but my wife publishes popular fiction and her contacts give the rights to the publisher even though the work is copyrighted to her. There is a clause in the contract, however, something to the effect that 6 years after the publication date, she can petition to get the rights transfferred to her. But that might be particular to her publisher

IOW, even though she is the copyright holder, she can't redistribute the content in any form per the contract.

Re:Backwards System

[spiffyman]

Your sentiment makes sense, but I have to agree with the GP. I think people miss some key points here:

1) The ethical (not legal - the contracts settle that) question up until this point has been whether the publishing company has a right to restrict distribution through other channels. It's not a hard case to make on the publishers' side: Until recently, there was little reason to expect that free distribution would make print sales go up, and the data on that remain unclear. So, as a publisher, why wouldn't you want to resist other distribution models?

2) If I read TFA properly, it appears that the text being distributed is the text that was edited, copy edited, etc. by Wiley. As far as I'm concerned, that gives Wiley just as much moral claim to the work as the author. People underestimate the amount of time and effort that goes into the editing process. Writers, by and large, are not good writers. So why should they always retain copyrights?

Disclaimer: I've edited for a newspaper in the past, and I'm currently an editor for an undergraduate journal, so I'm pretty obviously biased against authors-above-all types. Mod appropriately.

Grr

[imikem]

Did the authors of said fine book manage to spell "Engineering" correctly?

Come On, 'Enginner' Is A Word

[eldavojohn]

"Enginner": n. one who drinks gin and attempts to solve problems with gin and the mathematics of gin drinking. Ex. The sot that lay in the gutter claimed to be an enginner as a passerby spat on him.

"Enginnering": trans. v. to lay out, throw up, or manage as a gin drinker (see 'enginnerate').

more free books

[plopez]

google 'free books' or 'free books science' for a plethora of sites publishing or linking to books for which the copyrights have expired or been released.

"Share and enjoy!"

OT: Mirrored Content

[EnigmaticSource]

Sorry for the off thread/topic reply, but in the intrest of visibility, here you go:

Part 1: http://momoshare.com/file.php?file=1911bc824177937 7bdad8bc9387b4177
Part 2: http://momoshare.com/file.php?file=f88b489ca8f1dcd dc76778cee3ba9d7b

SHA1 Sums
b14f5b17f2284823cd803d2c1c01970ffe88684d seceng1.zip
740a0de7f86893326b074862abdf377c881734b3 seceng2.zip