Friday, March 09, 2007

Yesterday evening I attended a debate organised by the Authors' Collecting and Licensing Society and held at the British Library. The speakers were distinguished - three writers, one media executive, one book publisher and an MP - the auditorium was full of intelligent and interested people, the chairman was the excellent John Humphrys. Unfortunately and worryingly, the debate was trivial, shallow, anecdotal, self-serving, smug and boring. Apart from that it was okay. In an era where technology and social change are challenging copyright more fundamentally than at any time since its inception, the debate was typified by an anecdote about a magazine sublicensing an article to another magazine in Australia without informing the author. It was really a moan session between authors and publishers. Authors and publishers are on the same side when it comes to copyright and intra-trade squabbling will only serve to weaken the vital case for the retention and adaptation of copyright as a rewarder and guarantor of literary and other creativity. Harrumph.

On the other hand, this eloquent essay by Peter Brantley at the University of California Berkeley Library describing second thoughts about accepting Google's offer to digitise their books is much more germane. And I'm grateful to Michael Cairns and his Persona Non Data blog for this link.

The guy on the right of this photo is Peter Collins who, amongst many other responsibilities, is in charge of advertising at Nature Publishing Group. He is hard to recognise here because his shirt is white and tucked in.

Back in December I wrote about our experiment of allowing recruiters free advertisements in the online editions of our journals while charging for premium upgrades and word-associated links. I described it as 'another great moment in classified advertising'. The photo shows Peter, representing the Nature Jobs team, accepting the first prize in the Online Recruitment Awards Ceremony, a tribute to innovation and another great moment in classified advertising.

Yesterday's papers printed obituaries of two very different people both of whose inventions have changed millions of lives around the world -  Robert Adler with the TV remote control and more importantly for me Alejandro Finisterre who designed, built and eventually patented table football.

Next stop on my way to work is Shaftesbury Avenue and its theatres. Here's a non-contemporary picture for the sake of nostalgia.

Stop press: Try this link for an outstanding headline.

 

3/9/2007 8:39:43 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard

An aside from the copyright issue, and one which affects most webmasters.

I presume that you are searching on the likes of Google images for suitable photos and then cutting and pasting a link into your blog. I am sure that many image owners would be happy for "free-use" on a blog like this, with the image being copied onto an MDL server ; however, by directly linking to the image on another's website you are abusing their bandwidth and buggering up their stats.

Just a morning thought from the grumpy old bastard !
3/9/2007 10:51:53 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Everyone who's ever contacted me about this has been delighted with the link and I'm careful not to do more than fair use would allow. If linking direct is buggering up things then the whole web would be buggered! But we're entering areas of which I know little.
3/9/2007 12:00:44 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard

I can assure you that people linking directly to images on small operators websites is a proverbial pain in the butt.

On a weekly basis I have to be renaming images, editing webpages, and sometimes even totally removing items from the internet.

The greatest culprits are myspace and similar users, and being very blunt I would expect large businesses to be more ethical in this abuse of another's bandwidth whose costs they are not bearing.

Google images no more belong free use to everybody, without permission, than will scanned pages of copyright books.
3/9/2007 12:37:32 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
But I don't link direct to images; I copy and paste within fair usage...
3/9/2007 12:42:28 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard,

Are “authors and publishers are on the same side when it comes to copyright”?

I’d say yes, and no. Yes, because copyright protects income. But no, because the main threat for authors is obscurity, not distribution.

We, authors and publishers, are not on the same side because it makes a lot of sense for an unknown author to ‘freely give’ content, while publishers are still in the midst of trying to adapt to the ‘new media’.
3/9/2007 1:10:35 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard

I don't want to be pedantic but the image (properties) that you are using above has a direct linking

http://library.kent.ac.uk/library/special/html/specoll/princes2.jpg

Your blog is directly (ab)using the bandwidth of the original host. If you had actually copied the image onto an MDL server, the image properties would show that route path rather than the original host.
3/9/2007 1:20:30 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
"But I don't link direct to images; I copy and paste within fair usage..."

Step aside, grandad, you don't know how to operate within the legal framework of your industry.
J. Prescott
3/9/2007 2:28:36 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
the moaning about the relationship between authors and publishers seems so (too) very familar!!! and can only deserve our common cause. FEP has been pleading for this since many years already!

but it seems that some cannot resist depicting publishers as horrible persons abusing their powers.

I would not be working to defend persons like that!

Anne
3/9/2007 4:36:30 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard -

Thank you for mentioning my posting at the Berkeley web site. Because it has engendered some confusion, I have also posted a secondary note at: http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa/2007/03/09/google_books_a_reprise_with_clarity.

Also, I do not represent UC Berkeley, but rather the Digital Library Federation. UCB is generously permitting me to reside on their campus.

Thank you -