Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iBookstore to Include 30,000 Free eBooks From Project Gutenberg?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, Steve didn't want that. He wanted to keep the individual song download pricing at 99-cents.
It was the record labels who wanted variable pricing and it slowed down sales, at least according to one record label CEO:
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/201...t-itunes-expensive-music-equals-slower-sales/
I have never been charged sales tax for iTunes Store downloads, whether it be music, video, or app.
To quote Billy Preston... "Nothing from Nothing leaves Nothing."
Have you ever downloads a free app from the iTunes Store. I get emails all the time with these $0.00 "invoices" from Apple showing all the free crap I download.
No. It's Free. No revenue. Nothing to Tax. Nothing to Earn.
They aren't conspiracy theorists.Read properly before you post. It says in the article that the books were free when they same them in the iBook store.
What is with all these conspiracy theories?
They are simply people with bad reading comprehension and poor logical reasoning skills. Oh, and a few have no common sense and zero knowledge of the economics of the consumer electronics business. And a handful are just bitter because they didn't buy AAPL five years ago when it traded below $50/share.
That's all. (But you probably knew all of this...)
They aren't conspiracy theorists.
They are simply people with bad reading comprehension and poor logical reasoning skills. Oh, and a few have no common sense and zero knowledge of the economics of the consumer electronics business. And a handful are just bitter because they didn't buy AAPL five years ago when it traded below $50/share.
That's all. (But you probably knew all of this...)
QFT. Good one... Thanks for that!
Apple IS contributing to Project Guttenberg. They are providing distribution of PG's titles for FREE and selling an easy-to-access, portable and relatively low-cost platform to view them on. Since Project Guttenberg is all about free and wide distribution of its titles, that is support at the most basic level.
Perhaps Apple is giving them money in addition to exposure, but it's hardly true that Apple "owes" them for the distribution of their titles. Distribution of public domain titles is after all the whole point of their existence. To gain an important ally in that cause, and then declare that the ally "owes them", is schizophrenic to put it mildly.
Sounds great to me. Yes Apple should give them a donation, it would just be nice and a good thing to do!
![[DL]](/data/avatars/m/410/410081.jpg?1266785706){kind=avatar}
Welcome, Banquo!
About this WAY you're speaking of, and I quote:
"just like iTunes and your CDs" --> Are you say that you believe there is a way to somehow show iTunes you own a CD and get to download the digital version? I -- am -- so -- confused.
I don't think it works like this. But... again... welcome to the website!
Welcome first-time poster!
About this WAY you're speaking of, and I quote:
"just like iTunes and your CDs" --> Are you say that you believe there is a way to somehow show iTunes you own a CD and get to download the digital version? I -- am -- so -- confused.
I don't think it works like this. But... again... welcome to the website!
Yayyy, another app to duplicate....the web. Safari does exist on the iPad, right? Just as exciting as all those Wiki apps that access Wikipedia. Cause your phone didn't have a way to get to Wikipedia yesterday.
Geez, I guess the news is nice so those who have never heard of Gutenberg can learn of it, but really, what else does this accomplish? I've downloaded books to read many times from Gutenberg, and I didn't need an Apple press release (or app) to do so.
Geez, I guess the news is nice so those who have never heard of Gutenberg can learn of it, but really, what else does this accomplish? I've downloaded books to read many times from Gutenberg, and I didn't need an Apple press release (or app) to do so.
Good move by apple.
One little thing worries me though: Could that mean that we won't be able to put our own content in the iBook app?
My reasoning goes like this: If users could just put all the ASCIIs etc that they have on their computers into the iBook reader, then giving them access to Gutenberg wouldn't be necessary. They could just download stuff and drop it into the app. So the fact that they give us Gutenberg books as part of the iBookstore could indicate that we won't be able to get at them any other way.
That would be a bummer!
One little thing worries me though: Could that mean that we won't be able to put our own content in the iBook app?
My reasoning goes like this: If users could just put all the ASCIIs etc that they have on their computers into the iBook reader, then giving them access to Gutenberg wouldn't be necessary. They could just download stuff and drop it into the app. So the fact that they give us Gutenberg books as part of the iBookstore could indicate that we won't be able to get at them any other way.
That would be a bummer!
Wow, this is terrible. Encouraging Project Gutenberg means less money going to publishers, and less resources for them to pay hire editors and find new authors.
Amazing how quick people are to screw over artists and the industries that support them.
But in fairness, the guy who runs Gutenberg doesn't even believe in salaries for his own staff. If he got a billion dollars he still wouldn't pay them, according to an interview. So I guess it's not hypocritical that he doesn't care about the salaries of authors or publishers, either.
Amazing how quick people are to screw over artists and the industries that support them.
But in fairness, the guy who runs Gutenberg doesn't even believe in salaries for his own staff. If he got a billion dollars he still wouldn't pay them, according to an interview. So I guess it's not hypocritical that he doesn't care about the salaries of authors or publishers, either.
Huh? How does this screw anyone? Project Gutenberg consists of public domain works. The publishers had a very long time (depending on when the book was copyrighted, much more than 50 years) to earn a profit on these works. Now they are no longer copyrighted.
I should pay someone for a copy of a work that no one owns? Should I also pay for the air I breath?
I really hope you're kidding. These are all books whose copyright has expired. They should be free and available to as many people as possible. The more the better.
I've seen some twisted justifications about some of the RIAA/MPAA's practices with music/movies, but claiming that people who download non-copyrighted, free books are screwing over authors? Really?
Doesn't that require one to presume Apple isn't working with Project Gutenberg on this and that Apple is guilty of something?
And would it be better if Apple pretended Proj. Gute. didn't exist so that it's iBooks partners could sell unwitting consumers their public domain edition? Apple would pick up 30% of that too. But that's not what Apple is doing.
Do you even know what Public Domain means? Or that copyrights do not last forever... well unless you are Disney. Your statement is plain ignorant. I suggest you bone up on copyright law before you suggest Mark Twain is getting screwed.
Rather the opposite, I imagine. An explosion by hundreds of thousands in the number of people downloading copies would generate a substantial increase in bandwidth costs for the project--not to mention slam the servers and reduce overall availability. By placing a set on Apple's servers, there is now an alternative distribution channel that costs Project Gutenberg nothing.
Donating server resources and bandwidth is often more valuable to projects like this than actual cash.
Just hosting the content is a pretty substantial donation, to say nothing of the possibility of any cleanup work on the text formatting that might happen if Apple prepares its own ePub files.
If a party releases content in a manner that does not exempt commercial use, then it must fully contemplate the use of that content by commercial entities, without any expectation of anything in return. Project Gutenberg made that conscious choice. They could have easily released their efforts in the form of a no-commercial-use license had they desired such a restriction.
The right thing to do is to respect the license, and only falling short of that obligation is wrong. A direct monetary donation might be nice, but it's hardly the floor of what's right.