Why not donate, say, 3400 of them that you will never read again to a local public library? I have quite a few books myself and I'm contemplating doing exactly this (except for about 50 books that are rare, super-expensive or used often).
And as a public librarian, I strongly suggest that you ASK your librarian before you do this. If you show up at my library with that number of books, I will probably attempt to make you eat them.
I have a netflix subscription, and it hasn't stopped me from going to the theater. What it has done is stop me from going to blockbuster (or jumping on thepiratebay). While this is certainly an anecdote, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the general trend.
It certainly is where I live. In the past year, all four major local video rental stores within the area have closed. (We had a Blockbuster, a Hollywood Video, and two Giant Iggle videos--the supermarket ended the video stores within). I can't tell you the number of people who have come into my library looking for older movies that they have to watch for a class. My understanding is that Netflix and OnDemand are being blamed for killing the video stores. The problem now is that it leaves no quick way to get access to an older movie on a deadline other than a library (unless you luck out and OnDemand has it). Hope your kid doesn't get the same movie assignment as someone else. They're going to either have to change some of the assignments or start having video parties around here.
I guess my question would be if you can picture it or get it well enough if someone else reads it to you? Or do you not enjoy fiction in any form?
I admit that this is somewhat of a foreign concept to me, as I'm so textually oriented that I read things unconsciously sometimes, but I do struggle to parse spoken words when I get really tired. (It's like my brain just shuts down and hears English like it's a foreign language and I have to concentrate to break it down into disparate words and then translate them into meaning.)
So if I take my failings as a lesson... try reading when you're not tired or hungry or anything and when your concentration is going to be at its best, and if fiction doesn't appeal to you, then try some nonfiction with graphic scenes in it--something that might stimulate your imagination. Jon Krakauer's Into Thin Air, for example. Mostly, try and have fun, because it sounds like you're trying too hard with the fiction. Hell, I'm a librarian and there are certain types of fiction or certain authors that I have to force my way through because the language is just dead to me. (John Grisham does that to me.)
I'd try reading nonfiction that you find exciting and try picturing it as you go along. You could try history (930-990s in Dewey Decimal), biographies, true crime (364.15ish), true adventure/survival (910s). Most of all, pick something that sounds good to you, not to anyone else.:)
True, but a significant portion of intra-US trips take place within the northeast, the most densely populated part of the country. Washington-Boston is 450 miles; New York-Chicago is 800 miles.
If by Northeast you mean the Eastern Seaboard and Chicago.
I'd also argue that much of that travel to those cities is not necessarily by choice. Seriously, in order to go anywhere in this country, I have to fly to a freaking hub city, transfer, and fly to where I want to go, which is usually back the direction I came, past where I started, to my destination. If I'm really lucky, I get to do something asinine like fly from Pittsburgh to Atlanta to transfer so I can take a flight to, say, St. Louis. So instead of being a 2 hour flight, I have a monster 7 hour day of airlines. If you want to go from one smallish city to another in the Northeast, you drive because it usually takes less time and money.
Yes, maglev trains would be silly for the Eastern seaboard. Where they would be really useful would be connecting the smaller cities so that someone who needs to go from Buffalo, NY to Burlington, VT could get there faster than the 7 hours it takes to drive between the two places and with less hassle/more cheaply than the $250 and 4 hours (plus security/lines/check in time/baggage claim, etc) that using the airlines currently takes.
The question, of course, is whether or not the trains would see enough use to justify the cost of building, maintaining, and running them. I certainly hope so, because most of my travel is not to or from large cities and the current train and airline schedules don't work for reasonable travel. I usually end up doing an all-day drive somewhere. I can't be the only person this is true for...
Think again... If you install some electronic stuff in a modern US city, you can laugh as you watch the crowd getting crazy and paranoid... until they catch you.
Only in some cities. Remember, Boston was the only city to react that way to the Mooninites.
Hell, the Pittsburgh bomb squad is pretty damn calm about bombs. "Oh, that's suspicious. Right. Let's direct people away from there and get it investigated and if we need to we can send in the robot."
Most of the time I don't even know they've been somewhere unless someone I know walks into a cordon or sits in traffic for a bit and gets redirected or there's a small blurb in the newspaper about it. There certainly isn't the mass panic that apparently gripped Boston as they fumbled the response.
I view this as one of those topics that is rather meaningless as a survey, rather like "Would you kick a small, defenseless kitten for a sum of money?" People can say whatever they want, but unless they are actually at a point where they have to commit, it may not be what they would actually do.
Now if you were to stand there with legal papers for people to sign that gave away their right to vote in the next election and guaranteed them a one year scholarship to NYU upon signing, then I'm fairly certain you'd get different results. (I imagine you'd get different results in different years, too, depending on the candidates who were running and what state you were in. Fairly certain your candidate was going to win? Live in a state that is dominated by one party? I could see people deciding to go for the scholarship. It would be a much more difficult choice in a hotly contested state... or giving up the right to vote for life as opposed to one election.)
Though it's been several years since I've lived and voted in NY, I seem to recall that the lever machines they used definitely discouraged write-in candidates. Being under 5'4" tall, I could JUST reach to do a write-in candidate for an office if I stood on my very tiptoes. My election district apparently did not have anything for me to stand on to help me reach said write-in slots, according to the election officials. Maybe those chairs they were sitting on were too dangerous?
Apparently it's okay to disenfranchise short people if they aren't voting for a major party's candidate or something. *rolls her eyes*
I think some people talking to each other in a "normal volume" in a restaurant are rude if it's a very quiet restaurant and they aren't modulating their voices at all. Learn to talk appropriately so that the people at your table can hear you but quietly enough so that others cannot hear every word you're saying from across the room. No one else needs to know your private conversations.
This is also true in stores. If you are constantly talking to your friend loudly enough that people four aisles away can take part in your conversation? You're being rude. Whether or not that friend is with you or on the other end of your cell phone doesn't matter.
Somehow, people lost track of the concept of indoor and outdoor voices and how to be courteous to other users in public spaces.
So generally if I can hear you outside of your space and you're talking louder than you need to be to be heard by your companions and it's not a bloody emergency, you're being rude. At least with a cell phone, you have the option of taking it outside, which makes it more notable. (For the record, I feel the same way about children. If you take your 6 month old out to dinner and they scream for more than 5 minutes without you taking them out of the room, I will walk over to the table and ask you to please remove them until they stop. Don't take your kids out until they are old enough not to annoy other patrons.)
So no, talking on a cell phone "in a normal voice" is not automatically rude if that voice will not get you noticed. I've seen a number of people who are excellent at holding discreet conversations on their cell phones. If, however, your conversation intrudes into someone else's because you cannot gauge how loud it should be, you're being rude.
So many Web 2.0 apps are sold (or given away for free) by software-as-a-service companies like Google that people can bypass IT altogether, and IT might not even know until it's too late.
This reminds me very much of the theory that the Internet and then Google would replace American libraries and librarians. Instead, librarians are being run off their feet by the demand for electronic resources and Internet access and are using the new technologies to provide different services to patrons.
In the short run, Web 2.0 might shift some American IT workers around, but I'm having great difficulty seeing it wiping out huge numbers of jobs unless we have the world's most incompetent, inflexible IT workers.
I'm consistently amazed by how they let anyone who ISN'T in a hard science/math program get away without really ever understanding anything about science or math. A huge number of people don't have enough backing in the scientific method to have a basic sense of what is or isn't a fact - even in simple real world cases they can physically deal with. (Like how to fix household items, how to tell if a circuit is blown, how to debug RCA connections to their TV, etc.) And don't have enough backing in math to convert measurement units or tell if they got the right change.
That's like saying I'm consistently amazed by how they let anyone who IS in a hard science/math program get away without being able to follow basic English grammar rules or have any idea where other countries are on a map. (There's a reason I proofed my astrophysics and geology major roomie's papers for her in college.)
Really, it seems to depend more on the student than on what they are studying. I've met some pretty dense science students. I'm a librarian (MLS, BA in history, religious studies, and anthropology) and I'm great at knowing what is fact and what is opinion (IMO, at least *grin*). One of my favorite courses in college was Discrete Math, which I took along with some programming courses for fun. I can do all the things you mentioned above... and so can most of the people I ran around with.
Essentially, each person should be able to do a multitude of tasks that allow them to function as an adult in society, foremost among them read and assimilate information, write coherently, think critically, do basic calculations within their head, and apply logic (actual logic, in the mathematical sense, not some sort of truthiness logic as used by pundits).
In general, if you can do the above, then you will be able to fix your household appliances (if you can get them open), tell if a circuit is blown, and figure out why the DVD isn't playing on the TV. Even if you don't immediately know the exact things to look for, you have the tools necessary to gather the missing information and reason through it to a satisfactory solution.
So rather than casting stones at certain disciplines and lauding others, I'd focus on what I see as the general failure of our educational system right now: we're teaching our children what to think rather than how to think. Years ago, Feynman had an essay about how poorly today's science textbooks teach science because all they do is teach people to regurgitate things with no real understanding instead of hunkering down and defining terms. (What is energy? Energy comes from the sun! When you move, you use energy! Everything has energy! That's nice, but none of those has actually defined what it IS... Wish I remembered which collection that essay was in.) That seems to be true across all disciplines.
Or, better yet, check out your local library. I'm always amazed by how many people say "go buy this book!" when you can go try out books first at your library for weeks, and then if you find one that is working for you, THEN go buy it.
Hell of a lot cheaper.
Besides, we librarians are used to trying to find materials for people in exactly this sort of situation. I mean, we have your usual GED and SAT/ACT study materials if you want to use those, but even doing a basic search on the topic of "algebra" in my library gives me the following other options (plus a whole bunch more--these are the highlights):
The complete idiot's guide to algebra Homework helpers: algebra Homework helpers: basic math and pre-algebra Algebra demystified Linear algebra demystified Algebra success in 20 minutes a day Everyday math demystified The Facts on File algebra handbook A-Plus notes for beginning algebra (pre-algebra and algebra 1) How to solve algebra word problems Introductory algebra Painless algebra Forgotten algebra: a self-teaching refresher course
And that's just on algebra. We have the same variety for other areas of math, and if you're anywhere in the state of PA and your public library participates in Access PA, you can borrow our books for free. If you're in the same county as my library, you can place the hold yourself through the shared catalog.
We also have some that are ebooks and some software CDs.
So before you send people to a college bookstore to buy some hideously overpriced book, send them to the public library where they can learn all sorts of things for free.
If this idea matures I can see how insurance providers and health providers would need to ask for the patients permission to exchange information rather than just doing it...which is what happens today.
Um... wha? Who the hell are you going to? I had to have medical paperwork with all my doctors that authorizes them to communicate with my insurance. I had to sign a HIPAA form at my pharmacist's place. My doctors all had me sign forms which laid out their privacy policies, and they ask for my permission before they share information (or, more often, I have to have paperwork that details who ordered tests and who will receive copies). I even still have my privacy agreement from my dentist.
If your health providers are just wantonly sharing your information, find new ones or sue the pants off them.
I hated Zangarmarsh and found it rather boring and somewhat depressing. If you weren't an herbalist or druid, there was nothing to do there but kill naga and bog lords. Zzzzzzzz. Thanks for the useless rep.
I thought Hellfire had a much more interesting mix of quests, as did Netherstorm, and the quests in Blade's Edge and Shadowmoon required more cooperation and less boring grinding.
How about less goods and services from China? I would bet that most Americans, when asked if they prefer higher prices at Walmart in exchange for better wages, worker protection, and environmental protections in China would probably tell you they want lower prices and more American jobs (workers in China be damned as far as they are concerned).
Er, should I be the one to point out that those lower prices are because the jobs aren't American? You can either have lower prices because we're taking advantage of people around the world and polluting them and paying them less than a living wage, or you can have higher prices because we're paying Americans to do something, and that involves certain levels of environmental control and a living wage.
You don't get both, unless you mean those $5.50 part-time WalMart jobs selling all the Chinese-made goods. The little American flags with their Made in China stamps always make me particularly sad.
Not that your average consumer has the time, energy, and money to change their buying habits enough to make a difference. It's almost impossible to buy only things made in the US anymore. Even cereal--lots of times the dried fruit in it comes from China. (Doesn't that make you feel secure?)
Further, I'm 100% sure that you would archive *everything* if you had the space to do so. Electronic storage of books and articles means that you naturally do have the space to store everything - DRM just prevents you from of taking advantage of that fact.
IF we had the space and IF we had the money and IF we had the staff and IF we had the time to convert everything physical to digital and IF we had a good enough search algorithm to get relevant results from all the crap that would then be in the mix and IF whatever storage and retrieval methods we chose didn't go obsolete almost immediately, then yes, the library hosting original files and backing them up for every piece of information it ever touched would be ideal.
Can I toss in unicorns and a decent wage for me while we're dreaming?
The above is never going to happen. (Well, I'm holding out hopes for bits of it, particularly the decent wage bit, but the forces of the universe aligning so that all the others happen at the same time? I can't say I think that's likely.)
I understand what you're saying, but I'm afraid that I work too much with practicalities. Items get stolen or ruined. Web sites close. Small press publishers go out of business, and local businesses decide to stop putting out their annual Top Twenty Places to Go Do Whatever (which the public apparently can't live without). There are very few pieces of information that are considered so rare and valuable that they will soon not be either 1) out of date, or 2) not used enough by our patrons that it matters. It's difficult for me to get worked up over whether or not we'll have access to an eAudiobook download of The Devil Wears Prada in twenty years when I'm not even sure if anyone would be able to listen to it then. Or would want to.
I should point out that libraries are generally not choosing to do eAudiobook downloads instead of purchasing Books on CD or Cassette. For many, they've taken only a portion of that budget (which might have been spent on, say, extra copies or abridged copies) and put it towards the eAudiobooks. So instead of getting 4 unabridged versions and 2 abridged versions of the latest Janet Evanovich book on CD, the library might purchase 3 unabridged versions and 1 abridged version. At the same time, one person can check out the OverDrive copy, and if NetLibrary has a copy, multiple people can check it out at once. So in many cases, it's a format option for the patrons. They don't have to use it.
From a purely theoretical standpoint, DRM on items deprives people from access that would be useful or necessary in many circumstances. From a practical standpoint, it can serve a purpose in the library. (See my comments about check out times and copyright protection in previous post.)
If my choice is between providing bad service to my patrons by ignoring their requests based on a theoretical objection or giving them the service they're requesting and educating them about DRM and working to try and change it while we work with it, then I'm going for the second option. I'm more practical than theoretical in nature. The second never manages to calmly get the hundred people out of the building during the fire alarm.;)
And in the end, I'd rather not be the nanny who says, "No, you can't have this because the DRM isn't good for you." Let the people be educated and decide for themselves. They can always ignore the eAudiobooks and use our Books on CD instead.
As a librarian, it absolutely is your ethical/professional responsibility to evaluate the social implications of DRM technology and potentially take a stand on the issue.
While I agree that DRM falls within my professional concerns, it's not the main concern of my job, and I'm certainly not going to treat it as such. I have complained to eAudiobook reps about compatibility issues, I've compiled lists of alternate sources of eAudiobooks for patrons, and I've spent countless hours with patrons trying to get their downloading and transferring to their mp3 players to work. And while that is all a part of my job, it is still not the essence of my job, and I have neither the time nor the inclination to make it so.
Furthermore, if you want me to compare the use of DRM on eAudiobooks to the use of items owned by public libraries, you won't like the result.
The model for libraries has always been that the library actually controls a copy of the book / CD / tape and can lend it to anyone at any time. DRM-encumbered files give the publisher complete control - with a default of "deny access". That default is utterly incompatible with the mission of a public library.
Um, that's just not correct.
Public libraries have often owned or provided access to a great many items, including books, CDs, DVDs, periodical articles, and audiobooks. While many of those items were physically owned by the library, not all were. Often the public library would only have periodical indexes and would help a patron find where they could get a copy of an article--but the patron would have to secure it themselves or pay for it. The electronic databases of the past 15 years are an improvement over that in that we often have access to the full text of many articles, but again, that is leased access and it is controlled in a number of ways that the library pays for, including number of simultaneous users and whether or not remote access exists. If the vendor suddenly decides to shut down or change access or we stop paying for a database, that's the end of access.
As for the purpose of DRM on library items, let's look at how your normal library book is handled. Public Library X buys the book and makes it available. Patron A checks said book out. Patron A must return the book to the library or pay for it, and Patron A knows (or should know) that they cannot just photocopy the book because that is copyright infringement. Also, most books are rather prohibitively large to photocopy--you might as well just buy the thing. However, they can read the book and return it, and all is well and good. As for CDs, they can be borrowed and listened to and returned, but I certainly wouldn't let you walk in, pick up one of the library's music CDs and burn a copy for yourself on one of our computers without stopping you and telling you it was a violation of copyright.
If we move to the realm of eAudiobooks and attempt to apply the same expectations of a due date where the patron must stop using the item and a restriction on copying the item, we run into problems. The file the patron is downloading is not the one and only file; if the patron does not return it, they aren't billed for it and the library does not have to buy a new one. Instead, it is merely one copy of that original file. In order to make sure that the copy does not continue to exist forever without being checked out again, some form of control must be used on the file. That's where DRM comes in on library eAudiobooks. It also exists to prevent a patron from just copying the audiobook for their own use.
Now if this were my own personal audiobook, then no, DRM should not be on it. As a consumer, I am entitled to make back-up copies of my own purchase and listen to it for as long as I want. But as a library patron, it is not your book--you are borrowing it for an amount of time, you do not have the right to make back-ups, and this is the electronic way they enforce that.
To turn this back to OverDrive and other eAudiobook v
Sadly, there aren't that many good sites with more than, say, 10 free audio books on them. However, that's better than a couple years ago. I don't have my list with me atm, but off the top of my head:
If you go through through the list, you'll note that the vast majority are classics in the public domain rather than anything new. I can't say they've been a big hit with patrons.
There's also Audible.com,which is a pay site with DRMed files for both Mac and Windows.
For us, people often find the eAudiobooks in our catalog when they search and simply click on a link to it, so if they're looking for a specific book, that's often how they get to the OverDrive or NetLibrary version. I do agree that libraries should list the DRM-free audiobook sites on their Web pages, and you could always send them a polite e-mail suggesting that they do that as a service for patrons with incompatible systems, iPods, etc. After all, it will certainly make the library look much better too.:) (Sort of "We can't do anything about this right now, but we're out there looking for you guys too!")
I'm not sure what different libraries' policies would be about putting up links to commercial sites like Audible.com or Audio Books for Free that the library hasn't contracted with.
The library could ask patrons who feel serious about audio books to sign a petition against DRM in order to boost its negotiating power, right?
Any one library doing this would be ineffective. It has to be a big, organized movement, and frankly, we've got a few other things going on right now. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just don't expect your local library (which may consist of one overworked person) to necessarily put this at the top of their To Do list.
That said, I do recommend you stop in and have a friendly chat with your local librarian to find out what your library offers in this vein, what he/she knows about it, and if there's anything they think you can do to help. Offer to sign such a petition. If they don't really understand DRM, try and find a non-painful way to start educating them on the issues. I can't pretend that every library has only people who understand technology really well, but most libraries have people who want to serve their patrons well.
In another post, I gave the contact information for OverDrive, NetLibrary, and OCLC (NetLibrary's parent organization). I'd suggest writing to them about your concerns, too. I imagine they have to agree to DRM to get publishers to agree to distribute eAudiobooks through them. It might be easier to organize through a single organization or company to put pressure on publishers than through the widely scattered and varied libraries of America.
If your options for paper books were to keep them inside the physical presence of the library (and not lend them) or not to carry them at all, what would you do?
There are certainly cases where you cannot take books out of the library. In fact, there are whole libraries and collections like that where the items are too rare or valuable to circulate and the patrons have to come to the books. Also, I note that circulating books have to be returned to the library in a certain amount of time or you are billed to replace them, and if you were to take the book to the library's photocopier and attempt to photocopy the whole book, someone should stop you and tell you that you can't because that's a violation of copyright.
DRM on eAudiobooks is supposed to replicate the checkout function by causing eAudiobooks to expire when the checkout period is done so you can't keep them forever, and it's supposed to stop you from breaking copyright. So on digital items checked out from a library, DRM does have a legitimate function. Library patrons don't have the right to make back-up copies of the borrowed work or keep it forever. The trick is that 1) it needs to work, and 2) it needs to work with the systems and formats of our patrons and not exclude those who have something other than the dominant system.
Now if it were an eAudiobook or downloadable music I were purchasing for myself, I would expect it to be DRM-free so that I could make back-up copies and I wouldn't have to worry about licenses or time outs. If they can't offer multi-platform DRM for libraries, then I think the offerings need to be DRM-free. But I do still see the point of DRM when you're talking about borrowed electronic materials. (Other borrowed electronic materials such as databases handle compensation and access a different way, such as limiting the number of simultaneous users or whether the database can be accessed remotely and charging fees based on usage. It's all very... icky. That's the technical term.)
Richard Stallman sent a letter to the Boston Public Library (BPL) asking them to abandon the system they currently use to distribute audio books, since this format requires the use of proprietary software. It is illegal in the US to release free software capable of reading these audio books because of the Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) measures that are being imposed.
Did he, you know, bother to ask what the alternatives were?
There are no eAudiobook vendors for libraries that do not use DRM. Libraries are in the position of either not offering a service that is highly requested by patrons, or offering one that is useable only by those with the dominant operating system. As a librarian for a public library, I would gladly offer a DRM-free, non-proprietary format if one were available. However, since my options are DRM or nothing, then I must reluctantly opt for DRM.
So, rather than spamming libraries with form letters when they are not in a position to change the system, try writing to publishers and to the vendors (OverDrive, NetLibrary, Audible.com, etc.) with your comments.
Excellent. Thank you for posting that. So they're only a slightly better option, then. Essentially, we're going to have to push the publishers to allow DRM-free downloads, I think.
I forgot to mention that Audible.com offers audiobooks for download, and I'm under the impression that they're DRM-free and work with Macs. I haven't tried it, though, so I could be wrong. So a third option would be to somehow convince them (and have them convince their publishers) to enter the library market without adding DRM.
And yes, I _DO_ sit around all day and think about things like this and make up lists of where people can get free audiobook downloads. It's not like we don't care.:P
I have a response to this. Instead of haranguing the libraries, bug the hell out of the publishers. As it stands there are currently ZERO library vendors that offer eAudiobook downloads that are compatible with Mac or GNU/Linux because of the DRM on the files. This is certainly NOT the choice of the libraries.
I'm a librarian for a public library in Pittsburgh. We get requests all the time for downloadable audiobooks. We got requests before we had any options, and we get them now that we offer both OverDrive and Netlibrary downloads. At least OverDrive has the option to (in some cases, if the publisher has allowed it) burn the book to CD. After that, you can then import it to iTunes and transfer it over to your iPod. It's stupid clunky and you're better off just getting the CDs in the first place to listen that way, but it can be done and OverDrive's CEO has been known to tell people that.
Now, here's the question from the library's point of view. Is it better to not offer ANY eAudiobooks at all, despite the many requests for them, than to offer ones that can only be used by those with the dominant operating system? (We have to make the same decision with video games, too. What formats do we buy in?) With all due respect to the parent poster and to Mr. Stallman, my job is not to take a stand on DRM. It's to provide materials to the public in the formats they want, and that means that in some cases, like it or not, we're going to decide to offer eAudiobooks that cannot be used by all computer users. Just as DVDs cannot be watched by VCR owners, and CDs cannot be listened to by those with merely a tape deck, and Mac software cannot be run on a Windows machine. We're going to have to judiciously apportion an appropriate part of the budget according to demand for the items.
Now, would libraries love to change this? Yes. I personally have a list of free, non-DRM sites that allow you to download eAudiobooks for free that I hand out along with instructions on how the library-accessible eAudiobooks work. The problem is that those sites (such as Librivox or AudiobooksForFree) don't offer Janet Evanovich or John Patterson or the other bestsellers. They're generally things in the public domain (obviously), and our patrons usually want newer items.
Every chance I get, I complain to our Recorded Books representative (who works with Netlibrary) about the DRM limitations and make the case that should another company come along that offers downloads without DRM, we're gone to them no matter the cost. The libraries that have told OverDrive to buzz off in the past have just gotten shrugs. It doesn't change anything. (This includes the library located right next to Apple Headquarters, by the way. They finally gave in to demand.)
This is something that gets discussed all the time amongst librarians and on library blogs. My feeling is that complaining to the libraries is useless. We agree with you in spirit, but in practice, we're going to offer the product because our patrons want it. What we WILL support you in is complaining to the companies themselves, and in pushing the publishers to reach for a broader market. Instead of writing letters to libraries, spend your time convincing the publishers that they'll have wider listenership (without losing sales) if they hit the non-DRM market and convincing OverDrive and Netlibrary to begin offering other options than the protected WMA files.
From OverDrive's Web site, here's their contact information:
OverDrive, Inc. Valley Tech Center - Suite N 8555 Sweet Valley Drive Cleveland, OH 44125 USA Phone: (216) 573-6886 Fax: (216) 573-6888 Email: info@overdrive.com
And from NetLibrary's Web site:
NetLibrary Division Office 4888 Pearl East Circle, Ste. 103 Boulder, CO 80301 USA info@NetLibrary.com
Slashdot Mirror
Why not donate, say, 3400 of them that you will never read again to a local public library? I have quite a few books myself and I'm contemplating doing exactly this (except for about 50 books that are rare, super-expensive or used often).
And as a public librarian, I strongly suggest that you ASK your librarian before you do this. If you show up at my library with that number of books, I will probably attempt to make you eat them.
Here's a previous Slashdot comment I made regarding how different public libraries handle donations differently and how they may be either a boon or a burden, depending on the library.
Finally, if he enjoys having 3500 books and his family and friends use them, why shouldn't he have them?
I have a netflix subscription, and it hasn't stopped me from going to the theater. What it has done is stop me from going to blockbuster (or jumping on thepiratebay). While this is certainly an anecdote, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the general trend.
It certainly is where I live. In the past year, all four major local video rental stores within the area have closed. (We had a Blockbuster, a Hollywood Video, and two Giant Iggle videos--the supermarket ended the video stores within). I can't tell you the number of people who have come into my library looking for older movies that they have to watch for a class. My understanding is that Netflix and OnDemand are being blamed for killing the video stores. The problem now is that it leaves no quick way to get access to an older movie on a deadline other than a library (unless you luck out and OnDemand has it). Hope your kid doesn't get the same movie assignment as someone else. They're going to either have to change some of the assignments or start having video parties around here.
I guess my question would be if you can picture it or get it well enough if someone else reads it to you? Or do you not enjoy fiction in any form?
:)
I admit that this is somewhat of a foreign concept to me, as I'm so textually oriented that I read things unconsciously sometimes, but I do struggle to parse spoken words when I get really tired. (It's like my brain just shuts down and hears English like it's a foreign language and I have to concentrate to break it down into disparate words and then translate them into meaning.)
So if I take my failings as a lesson... try reading when you're not tired or hungry or anything and when your concentration is going to be at its best, and if fiction doesn't appeal to you, then try some nonfiction with graphic scenes in it--something that might stimulate your imagination. Jon Krakauer's Into Thin Air, for example. Mostly, try and have fun, because it sounds like you're trying too hard with the fiction. Hell, I'm a librarian and there are certain types of fiction or certain authors that I have to force my way through because the language is just dead to me. (John Grisham does that to me.)
I'd try reading nonfiction that you find exciting and try picturing it as you go along. You could try history (930-990s in Dewey Decimal), biographies, true crime (364.15ish), true adventure/survival (910s). Most of all, pick something that sounds good to you, not to anyone else.
True, but a significant portion of intra-US trips take place within the northeast, the most densely populated part of the country. Washington-Boston is 450 miles; New York-Chicago is 800 miles.
If by Northeast you mean the Eastern Seaboard and Chicago.
I'd also argue that much of that travel to those cities is not necessarily by choice. Seriously, in order to go anywhere in this country, I have to fly to a freaking hub city, transfer, and fly to where I want to go, which is usually back the direction I came, past where I started, to my destination. If I'm really lucky, I get to do something asinine like fly from Pittsburgh to Atlanta to transfer so I can take a flight to, say, St. Louis. So instead of being a 2 hour flight, I have a monster 7 hour day of airlines. If you want to go from one smallish city to another in the Northeast, you drive because it usually takes less time and money.
Yes, maglev trains would be silly for the Eastern seaboard. Where they would be really useful would be connecting the smaller cities so that someone who needs to go from Buffalo, NY to Burlington, VT could get there faster than the 7 hours it takes to drive between the two places and with less hassle/more cheaply than the $250 and 4 hours (plus security/lines/check in time/baggage claim, etc) that using the airlines currently takes.
The question, of course, is whether or not the trains would see enough use to justify the cost of building, maintaining, and running them. I certainly hope so, because most of my travel is not to or from large cities and the current train and airline schedules don't work for reasonable travel. I usually end up doing an all-day drive somewhere. I can't be the only person this is true for...
Think again... If you install some electronic stuff in a modern US city, you can laugh as you watch the crowd getting crazy and paranoid... until they catch you.
Only in some cities. Remember, Boston was the only city to react that way to the Mooninites.
Hell, the Pittsburgh bomb squad is pretty damn calm about bombs. "Oh, that's suspicious. Right. Let's direct people away from there and get it investigated and if we need to we can send in the robot."
Most of the time I don't even know they've been somewhere unless someone I know walks into a cordon or sits in traffic for a bit and gets redirected or there's a small blurb in the newspaper about it. There certainly isn't the mass panic that apparently gripped Boston as they fumbled the response.
I view this as one of those topics that is rather meaningless as a survey, rather like "Would you kick a small, defenseless kitten for a sum of money?" People can say whatever they want, but unless they are actually at a point where they have to commit, it may not be what they would actually do.
Now if you were to stand there with legal papers for people to sign that gave away their right to vote in the next election and guaranteed them a one year scholarship to NYU upon signing, then I'm fairly certain you'd get different results. (I imagine you'd get different results in different years, too, depending on the candidates who were running and what state you were in. Fairly certain your candidate was going to win? Live in a state that is dominated by one party? I could see people deciding to go for the scholarship. It would be a much more difficult choice in a hotly contested state... or giving up the right to vote for life as opposed to one election.)
Though it's been several years since I've lived and voted in NY, I seem to recall that the lever machines they used definitely discouraged write-in candidates. Being under 5'4" tall, I could JUST reach to do a write-in candidate for an office if I stood on my very tiptoes. My election district apparently did not have anything for me to stand on to help me reach said write-in slots, according to the election officials. Maybe those chairs they were sitting on were too dangerous?
Apparently it's okay to disenfranchise short people if they aren't voting for a major party's candidate or something. *rolls her eyes*
What are we calling a normal volume?
I think some people talking to each other in a "normal volume" in a restaurant are rude if it's a very quiet restaurant and they aren't modulating their voices at all. Learn to talk appropriately so that the people at your table can hear you but quietly enough so that others cannot hear every word you're saying from across the room. No one else needs to know your private conversations.
This is also true in stores. If you are constantly talking to your friend loudly enough that people four aisles away can take part in your conversation? You're being rude. Whether or not that friend is with you or on the other end of your cell phone doesn't matter.
Somehow, people lost track of the concept of indoor and outdoor voices and how to be courteous to other users in public spaces.
So generally if I can hear you outside of your space and you're talking louder than you need to be to be heard by your companions and it's not a bloody emergency, you're being rude. At least with a cell phone, you have the option of taking it outside, which makes it more notable. (For the record, I feel the same way about children. If you take your 6 month old out to dinner and they scream for more than 5 minutes without you taking them out of the room, I will walk over to the table and ask you to please remove them until they stop. Don't take your kids out until they are old enough not to annoy other patrons.)
So no, talking on a cell phone "in a normal voice" is not automatically rude if that voice will not get you noticed. I've seen a number of people who are excellent at holding discreet conversations on their cell phones. If, however, your conversation intrudes into someone else's because you cannot gauge how loud it should be, you're being rude.
So many Web 2.0 apps are sold (or given away for free) by software-as-a-service companies like Google that people can bypass IT altogether, and IT might not even know until it's too late.
This reminds me very much of the theory that the Internet and then Google would replace American libraries and librarians. Instead, librarians are being run off their feet by the demand for electronic resources and Internet access and are using the new technologies to provide different services to patrons.
In the short run, Web 2.0 might shift some American IT workers around, but I'm having great difficulty seeing it wiping out huge numbers of jobs unless we have the world's most incompetent, inflexible IT workers.
I'm consistently amazed by how they let anyone who ISN'T in a hard science/math program get away without really ever understanding anything about science or math. A huge number of people don't have enough backing in the scientific method to have a basic sense of what is or isn't a fact - even in simple real world cases they can physically deal with. (Like how to fix household items, how to tell if a circuit is blown, how to debug RCA connections to their TV, etc.) And don't have enough backing in math to convert measurement units or tell if they got the right change.
That's like saying I'm consistently amazed by how they let anyone who IS in a hard science/math program get away without being able to follow basic English grammar rules or have any idea where other countries are on a map. (There's a reason I proofed my astrophysics and geology major roomie's papers for her in college.)
Really, it seems to depend more on the student than on what they are studying. I've met some pretty dense science students. I'm a librarian (MLS, BA in history, religious studies, and anthropology) and I'm great at knowing what is fact and what is opinion (IMO, at least *grin*). One of my favorite courses in college was Discrete Math, which I took along with some programming courses for fun. I can do all the things you mentioned above... and so can most of the people I ran around with.
Essentially, each person should be able to do a multitude of tasks that allow them to function as an adult in society, foremost among them read and assimilate information, write coherently, think critically, do basic calculations within their head, and apply logic (actual logic, in the mathematical sense, not some sort of truthiness logic as used by pundits).
In general, if you can do the above, then you will be able to fix your household appliances (if you can get them open), tell if a circuit is blown, and figure out why the DVD isn't playing on the TV. Even if you don't immediately know the exact things to look for, you have the tools necessary to gather the missing information and reason through it to a satisfactory solution.
So rather than casting stones at certain disciplines and lauding others, I'd focus on what I see as the general failure of our educational system right now: we're teaching our children what to think rather than how to think. Years ago, Feynman had an essay about how poorly today's science textbooks teach science because all they do is teach people to regurgitate things with no real understanding instead of hunkering down and defining terms. (What is energy? Energy comes from the sun! When you move, you use energy! Everything has energy! That's nice, but none of those has actually defined what it IS... Wish I remembered which collection that essay was in.) That seems to be true across all disciplines.
Or, better yet, check out your local library. I'm always amazed by how many people say "go buy this book!" when you can go try out books first at your library for weeks, and then if you find one that is working for you, THEN go buy it.
Hell of a lot cheaper.
Besides, we librarians are used to trying to find materials for people in exactly this sort of situation. I mean, we have your usual GED and SAT/ACT study materials if you want to use those, but even doing a basic search on the topic of "algebra" in my library gives me the following other options (plus a whole bunch more--these are the highlights):
The complete idiot's guide to algebra
Homework helpers: algebra
Homework helpers: basic math and pre-algebra
Algebra demystified
Linear algebra demystified
Algebra success in 20 minutes a day
Everyday math demystified
The Facts on File algebra handbook
A-Plus notes for beginning algebra (pre-algebra and algebra 1)
How to solve algebra word problems
Introductory algebra
Painless algebra
Forgotten algebra: a self-teaching refresher course
And that's just on algebra. We have the same variety for other areas of math, and if you're anywhere in the state of PA and your public library participates in Access PA, you can borrow our books for free. If you're in the same county as my library, you can place the hold yourself through the shared catalog.
We also have some that are ebooks and some software CDs.
So before you send people to a college bookstore to buy some hideously overpriced book, send them to the public library where they can learn all sorts of things for free.
If this idea matures I can see how insurance providers and health providers would need to ask for the patients permission to exchange information rather than just doing it...which is what happens today.
Um... wha? Who the hell are you going to? I had to have medical paperwork with all my doctors that authorizes them to communicate with my insurance. I had to sign a HIPAA form at my pharmacist's place. My doctors all had me sign forms which laid out their privacy policies, and they ask for my permission before they share information (or, more often, I have to have paperwork that details who ordered tests and who will receive copies). I even still have my privacy agreement from my dentist.
If your health providers are just wantonly sharing your information, find new ones or sue the pants off them.
I hated Zangarmarsh and found it rather boring and somewhat depressing. If you weren't an herbalist or druid, there was nothing to do there but kill naga and bog lords. Zzzzzzzz. Thanks for the useless rep.
I thought Hellfire had a much more interesting mix of quests, as did Netherstorm, and the quests in Blade's Edge and Shadowmoon required more cooperation and less boring grinding.
How about less goods and services from China? I would bet that most Americans, when asked if they prefer higher prices at Walmart in exchange for better wages, worker protection, and environmental protections in China would probably tell you they want lower prices and more American jobs (workers in China be damned as far as they are concerned).
Er, should I be the one to point out that those lower prices are because the jobs aren't American? You can either have lower prices because we're taking advantage of people around the world and polluting them and paying them less than a living wage, or you can have higher prices because we're paying Americans to do something, and that involves certain levels of environmental control and a living wage.
You don't get both, unless you mean those $5.50 part-time WalMart jobs selling all the Chinese-made goods. The little American flags with their Made in China stamps always make me particularly sad.
Not that your average consumer has the time, energy, and money to change their buying habits enough to make a difference. It's almost impossible to buy only things made in the US anymore. Even cereal--lots of times the dried fruit in it comes from China. (Doesn't that make you feel secure?)
Further, I'm 100% sure that you would archive *everything* if you had the space to do so. Electronic storage of books and articles means that you naturally do have the space to store everything - DRM just prevents you from of taking advantage of that fact.
;)
IF we had the space and IF we had the money and IF we had the staff and IF we had the time to convert everything physical to digital and IF we had a good enough search algorithm to get relevant results from all the crap that would then be in the mix and IF whatever storage and retrieval methods we chose didn't go obsolete almost immediately, then yes, the library hosting original files and backing them up for every piece of information it ever touched would be ideal.
Can I toss in unicorns and a decent wage for me while we're dreaming?
The above is never going to happen. (Well, I'm holding out hopes for bits of it, particularly the decent wage bit, but the forces of the universe aligning so that all the others happen at the same time? I can't say I think that's likely.)
I understand what you're saying, but I'm afraid that I work too much with practicalities. Items get stolen or ruined. Web sites close. Small press publishers go out of business, and local businesses decide to stop putting out their annual Top Twenty Places to Go Do Whatever (which the public apparently can't live without). There are very few pieces of information that are considered so rare and valuable that they will soon not be either 1) out of date, or 2) not used enough by our patrons that it matters. It's difficult for me to get worked up over whether or not we'll have access to an eAudiobook download of The Devil Wears Prada in twenty years when I'm not even sure if anyone would be able to listen to it then. Or would want to.
I should point out that libraries are generally not choosing to do eAudiobook downloads instead of purchasing Books on CD or Cassette. For many, they've taken only a portion of that budget (which might have been spent on, say, extra copies or abridged copies) and put it towards the eAudiobooks. So instead of getting 4 unabridged versions and 2 abridged versions of the latest Janet Evanovich book on CD, the library might purchase 3 unabridged versions and 1 abridged version. At the same time, one person can check out the OverDrive copy, and if NetLibrary has a copy, multiple people can check it out at once. So in many cases, it's a format option for the patrons. They don't have to use it.
From a purely theoretical standpoint, DRM on items deprives people from access that would be useful or necessary in many circumstances. From a practical standpoint, it can serve a purpose in the library. (See my comments about check out times and copyright protection in previous post.)
If my choice is between providing bad service to my patrons by ignoring their requests based on a theoretical objection or giving them the service they're requesting and educating them about DRM and working to try and change it while we work with it, then I'm going for the second option. I'm more practical than theoretical in nature. The second never manages to calmly get the hundred people out of the building during the fire alarm.
And in the end, I'd rather not be the nanny who says, "No, you can't have this because the DRM isn't good for you." Let the people be educated and decide for themselves. They can always ignore the eAudiobooks and use our Books on CD instead.
As a librarian, it absolutely is your ethical/professional responsibility to evaluate the social implications of DRM technology and potentially take a stand on the issue.
While I agree that DRM falls within my professional concerns, it's not the main concern of my job, and I'm certainly not going to treat it as such. I have complained to eAudiobook reps about compatibility issues, I've compiled lists of alternate sources of eAudiobooks for patrons, and I've spent countless hours with patrons trying to get their downloading and transferring to their mp3 players to work. And while that is all a part of my job, it is still not the essence of my job, and I have neither the time nor the inclination to make it so.
Furthermore, if you want me to compare the use of DRM on eAudiobooks to the use of items owned by public libraries, you won't like the result.
The model for libraries has always been that the library actually controls a copy of the book / CD / tape and can lend it to anyone at any time. DRM-encumbered files give the publisher complete control - with a default of "deny access". That default is utterly incompatible with the mission of a public library.
Um, that's just not correct.
Public libraries have often owned or provided access to a great many items, including books, CDs, DVDs, periodical articles, and audiobooks. While many of those items were physically owned by the library, not all were. Often the public library would only have periodical indexes and would help a patron find where they could get a copy of an article--but the patron would have to secure it themselves or pay for it. The electronic databases of the past 15 years are an improvement over that in that we often have access to the full text of many articles, but again, that is leased access and it is controlled in a number of ways that the library pays for, including number of simultaneous users and whether or not remote access exists. If the vendor suddenly decides to shut down or change access or we stop paying for a database, that's the end of access.
As for the purpose of DRM on library items, let's look at how your normal library book is handled. Public Library X buys the book and makes it available. Patron A checks said book out. Patron A must return the book to the library or pay for it, and Patron A knows (or should know) that they cannot just photocopy the book because that is copyright infringement. Also, most books are rather prohibitively large to photocopy--you might as well just buy the thing. However, they can read the book and return it, and all is well and good. As for CDs, they can be borrowed and listened to and returned, but I certainly wouldn't let you walk in, pick up one of the library's music CDs and burn a copy for yourself on one of our computers without stopping you and telling you it was a violation of copyright.
If we move to the realm of eAudiobooks and attempt to apply the same expectations of a due date where the patron must stop using the item and a restriction on copying the item, we run into problems. The file the patron is downloading is not the one and only file; if the patron does not return it, they aren't billed for it and the library does not have to buy a new one. Instead, it is merely one copy of that original file. In order to make sure that the copy does not continue to exist forever without being checked out again, some form of control must be used on the file. That's where DRM comes in on library eAudiobooks. It also exists to prevent a patron from just copying the audiobook for their own use.
Now if this were my own personal audiobook, then no, DRM should not be on it. As a consumer, I am entitled to make back-up copies of my own purchase and listen to it for as long as I want. But as a library patron, it is not your book--you are borrowing it for an amount of time, you do not have the right to make back-ups, and this is the electronic way they enforce that.
To turn this back to OverDrive and other eAudiobook v
Sadly, there aren't that many good sites with more than, say, 10 free audio books on them. However, that's better than a couple years ago. I don't have my list with me atm, but off the top of my head:
:) (Sort of "We can't do anything about this right now, but we're out there looking for you guys too!")
Librivox
Audio Books For Free (which has both free and pay options)
Free Classic Audio Books
And this great post Audiobook Podcast Collection at Open Culture, which lists some sites at the bottom.
If you go through through the list, you'll note that the vast majority are classics in the public domain rather than anything new. I can't say they've been a big hit with patrons.
There's also Audible.com,which is a pay site with DRMed files for both Mac and Windows.
For us, people often find the eAudiobooks in our catalog when they search and simply click on a link to it, so if they're looking for a specific book, that's often how they get to the OverDrive or NetLibrary version. I do agree that libraries should list the DRM-free audiobook sites on their Web pages, and you could always send them a polite e-mail suggesting that they do that as a service for patrons with incompatible systems, iPods, etc. After all, it will certainly make the library look much better too.
I'm not sure what different libraries' policies would be about putting up links to commercial sites like Audible.com or Audio Books for Free that the library hasn't contracted with.
The library could ask patrons who feel serious about audio books to sign a petition against DRM in order to boost its negotiating power, right?
Any one library doing this would be ineffective. It has to be a big, organized movement, and frankly, we've got a few other things going on right now. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just don't expect your local library (which may consist of one overworked person) to necessarily put this at the top of their To Do list.
That said, I do recommend you stop in and have a friendly chat with your local librarian to find out what your library offers in this vein, what he/she knows about it, and if there's anything they think you can do to help. Offer to sign such a petition. If they don't really understand DRM, try and find a non-painful way to start educating them on the issues. I can't pretend that every library has only people who understand technology really well, but most libraries have people who want to serve their patrons well.
In another post, I gave the contact information for OverDrive, NetLibrary, and OCLC (NetLibrary's parent organization). I'd suggest writing to them about your concerns, too. I imagine they have to agree to DRM to get publishers to agree to distribute eAudiobooks through them. It might be easier to organize through a single organization or company to put pressure on publishers than through the widely scattered and varied libraries of America.
If your options for paper books were to keep them inside the physical presence of the library (and not lend them) or not to carry them at all, what would you do?
There are certainly cases where you cannot take books out of the library. In fact, there are whole libraries and collections like that where the items are too rare or valuable to circulate and the patrons have to come to the books. Also, I note that circulating books have to be returned to the library in a certain amount of time or you are billed to replace them, and if you were to take the book to the library's photocopier and attempt to photocopy the whole book, someone should stop you and tell you that you can't because that's a violation of copyright.
DRM on eAudiobooks is supposed to replicate the checkout function by causing eAudiobooks to expire when the checkout period is done so you can't keep them forever, and it's supposed to stop you from breaking copyright. So on digital items checked out from a library, DRM does have a legitimate function. Library patrons don't have the right to make back-up copies of the borrowed work or keep it forever. The trick is that 1) it needs to work, and 2) it needs to work with the systems and formats of our patrons and not exclude those who have something other than the dominant system.
Now if it were an eAudiobook or downloadable music I were purchasing for myself, I would expect it to be DRM-free so that I could make back-up copies and I wouldn't have to worry about licenses or time outs. If they can't offer multi-platform DRM for libraries, then I think the offerings need to be DRM-free. But I do still see the point of DRM when you're talking about borrowed electronic materials. (Other borrowed electronic materials such as databases handle compensation and access a different way, such as limiting the number of simultaneous users or whether the database can be accessed remotely and charging fees based on usage. It's all very... icky. That's the technical term.)
Richard Stallman sent a letter to the Boston Public Library (BPL) asking them to abandon the system they currently use to distribute audio books, since this format requires the use of proprietary software. It is illegal in the US to release free software capable of reading these audio books because of the Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) measures that are being imposed.
Did he, you know, bother to ask what the alternatives were?
There are no eAudiobook vendors for libraries that do not use DRM. Libraries are in the position of either not offering a service that is highly requested by patrons, or offering one that is useable only by those with the dominant operating system. As a librarian for a public library, I would gladly offer a DRM-free, non-proprietary format if one were available. However, since my options are DRM or nothing, then I must reluctantly opt for DRM.
So, rather than spamming libraries with form letters when they are not in a position to change the system, try writing to publishers and to the vendors (OverDrive, NetLibrary, Audible.com, etc.) with your comments.
Excellent. Thank you for posting that. So they're only a slightly better option, then. Essentially, we're going to have to push the publishers to allow DRM-free downloads, I think.
You'd be wrong, actually, though it was a nice guess. Very good chance, statistically speaking.
Yes, replying to my own post. *sigh*
:P
I forgot to mention that Audible.com offers audiobooks for download, and I'm under the impression that they're DRM-free and work with Macs. I haven't tried it, though, so I could be wrong. So a third option would be to somehow convince them (and have them convince their publishers) to enter the library market without adding DRM.
And yes, I _DO_ sit around all day and think about things like this and make up lists of where people can get free audiobook downloads. It's not like we don't care.
I have a response to this. Instead of haranguing the libraries, bug the hell out of the publishers. As it stands there are currently ZERO library vendors that offer eAudiobook downloads that are compatible with Mac or GNU/Linux because of the DRM on the files. This is certainly NOT the choice of the libraries.
I'm a librarian for a public library in Pittsburgh. We get requests all the time for downloadable audiobooks. We got requests before we had any options, and we get them now that we offer both OverDrive and Netlibrary downloads. At least OverDrive has the option to (in some cases, if the publisher has allowed it) burn the book to CD. After that, you can then import it to iTunes and transfer it over to your iPod. It's stupid clunky and you're better off just getting the CDs in the first place to listen that way, but it can be done and OverDrive's CEO has been known to tell people that.
Now, here's the question from the library's point of view. Is it better to not offer ANY eAudiobooks at all, despite the many requests for them, than to offer ones that can only be used by those with the dominant operating system? (We have to make the same decision with video games, too. What formats do we buy in?) With all due respect to the parent poster and to Mr. Stallman, my job is not to take a stand on DRM. It's to provide materials to the public in the formats they want, and that means that in some cases, like it or not, we're going to decide to offer eAudiobooks that cannot be used by all computer users. Just as DVDs cannot be watched by VCR owners, and CDs cannot be listened to by those with merely a tape deck, and Mac software cannot be run on a Windows machine. We're going to have to judiciously apportion an appropriate part of the budget according to demand for the items.
Now, would libraries love to change this? Yes. I personally have a list of free, non-DRM sites that allow you to download eAudiobooks for free that I hand out along with instructions on how the library-accessible eAudiobooks work. The problem is that those sites (such as Librivox or AudiobooksForFree) don't offer Janet Evanovich or John Patterson or the other bestsellers. They're generally things in the public domain (obviously), and our patrons usually want newer items.
Every chance I get, I complain to our Recorded Books representative (who works with Netlibrary) about the DRM limitations and make the case that should another company come along that offers downloads without DRM, we're gone to them no matter the cost. The libraries that have told OverDrive to buzz off in the past have just gotten shrugs. It doesn't change anything. (This includes the library located right next to Apple Headquarters, by the way. They finally gave in to demand.)
This is something that gets discussed all the time amongst librarians and on library blogs. My feeling is that complaining to the libraries is useless. We agree with you in spirit, but in practice, we're going to offer the product because our patrons want it. What we WILL support you in is complaining to the companies themselves, and in pushing the publishers to reach for a broader market. Instead of writing letters to libraries, spend your time convincing the publishers that they'll have wider listenership (without losing sales) if they hit the non-DRM market and convincing OverDrive and Netlibrary to begin offering other options than the protected WMA files.
From OverDrive's Web site, here's their contact information:
OverDrive, Inc.
Valley Tech Center - Suite N
8555 Sweet Valley Drive
Cleveland, OH 44125 USA
Phone: (216) 573-6886
Fax: (216) 573-6888
Email: info@overdrive.com
And from NetLibrary's Web site:
NetLibrary Division Office
4888 Pearl East Circle, Ste. 103
Boulder, CO 80301
USA
info@NetLibrary.com
Or, since NetLibrary is a division of OCLC:
Headquarters
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
That's awesome. You completely made my day. :)
I usually find librarians much more fun to read about than Libertarians, anyways. Could be because I am one, though. (Bias alert!)
Argh. If I hadn't already replied in here, I'd mod you up for mentioning politicalcompass.org. Hope someone else does. :)