A Legal Used Ebook Market? Who Would This Screw the Most?

Used ebooks may
be a coming

Who do you think would get screwed over the most if the powers that be navigated the legal maze, ironed out the fine points and actually established a used ebook market?

Make no mistake about it, selling used digital books commercially is not legal now.

Contracts, copyrights, digital rights, royalty splits, etc. have not been worked out yet --- Hell, these documents and agreements are barely in place for new digital content.

Readers (consumers), publishers, authors, retailers, etc. would all be affected --- but, who would probably take it on the chin the most?

You might be surprised. Maybe no one if they get the right negotiated clauses established.

Let's get into some scenarios and numbers with Jeremy Greenfield of Forbes:


What Happens to Publishers and Authors If a Used Ebook Market Becomes Legal?

Amazon has a patent to develop a market for used digital content. Apple has filed for a similar patent and ReDigi, a self-styled marketplace for used digital content, is currently embroiled in a legal battle with Capitol Records over the resale of digital music files.

Basically, it looks like a used ebook marketplace might become a reality.

For consumers, this could be very good news indeed. Imagine seeing on an ebook’s Kindle page a link that will take you to a sell page for the exact same product for half the price. Same ebook, same user experience, even lower cost.

For publishers, this would undoubtedly be very bad news.

Put simply, “This will wreak havoc with the business model,” said New York-based copyright lawyer Lloyd Jassin, adding, “this shows just how creaky the publishing business model is.”

The publishing business model is predicated in part on copyright law, which gives publishers the ability to control the scarcity of a piece of content, according to Jassin. Basically, by buying the right to produce and distribute a work, a publisher can control the number of copies out in the marketplace and monetize them accordingly. Under the doctrine of first sale, once a publisher sells that copy, it is relinquishing its rights to sell that copy again and whoever bought it can do so. That’s how it’s possible (and legal) to sell used copies of physical books.

In this scenario, the publisher (and author) get no compensation. If the same were true for the resale of digital goods, it could be devastating for publishers.

However, Apple‘s ebook patent and ReDigi’s business model, for instance, factor in these fears. Under their systems, publishers (and, perhaps, by extension authors) would get a piece of the resale.

“If the publisher can’t control the resale of a book but they get compensated, perhaps that’s good enough,” said Jassin.

But what about the authors?

There are often provisions in publishing agreements which provide for a split of proceeds resulting in fees from licensing or from any other profits associated with the work, a lawyer who specializes in ebook contracts who did not want to be named, told me.

“There are potentially catchall licensing agreements in publishing contracts that might apply to a resale,” the lawyer said, adding that if not, “authors may now want to negotiate a provision for that purpose.”

Read and learn more

Get the Writers Welcome Blog on Kindle :)))

Apple Counterpunches the Government's E-Book Lawsuit

Apple, Amazon, DOJ
Courtroom Drama

Most who are familiar with this blog know I have posted many updates on the intrigue RE Apple, Amazon, the Justice Department and the price-fixing debacle. 

Apple, on appeal, accuses the government of siding with “monopoly, rather than competition” when it handed down it's first ruling.

What do you think are Apples chances on this countersuit? Did the DOJ jump the gun? Did they make too many suppositions? Did they have the actual evidence on price manipulation? Did they in fact side with monopolistic practices?

I feel one thing --- whoever wins, the market prices will be set by the buying public. The old supply and demand will be the price driver, not an agenda-ridden retailer. And this is true competition.

Nick Wingfield, The New York Times, has this latest update:

Apple Strikes Back at Government E-Book Lawsuit

A few days ago, Apple filed a formal response to the antitrust lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice in April against it and several book publishers.

The gist of the 31-page filing is the same as Apple’s previous comments on the case: the company denies that it conspired with book publishers to raise e-book prices in a bid to give Apple’s new iPad a boost and to thwart the low e-book pricing of Amazon. But Apple put its objections to the case in somewhat sharper terms in the new filing, accusing the government of siding with “monopoly, rather than competition,” a reference to Amazon, the leader in e-book retailing.

“The government starts from the false premise that an e-books ‘market’ was characterized by ‘robust price competition’ prior to Apple’s entry,” Apple said in its filing. “This ignores a simple and incontrovertible fact: before 2010, there was no real competition, there was only Amazon.”

One noteworthy part of Apple’s response is a denial of one of the more juicy accusations in the government’s suit: namely, that in 2009 Apple “contemplated illegally dividing the digital content world with Amazon, allowing each to ‘own the category’ of its choice — audio/video to Apple and e-books to Amazon.” The government did not say in its filing exactly what evidence it had to prove that accusation.

Read and learn more

Writers Welcome Blog is available on Kindle :)))

In the eBook Business, Authors and Readers Are Necessary, Publishers Are Not

Publishers Panic!

History repeats itself, especially if people do not learn from past mistakes.

The publishing industry [by that I mean the old, big house publishing model - not the new digital, streamlined model :)] is going down the same mistake laden path that the music industry did a few years ago.

And what's worse, I believe the publishing powers to be (or should I say mental midgets) were warned of this.

When the new digital tech RE publishing exploded on the scene and leveled the playing field, big publishers tried to maintain ebook prices at or close to print book prices.

Well, the book loving public (smarter than they realized --- as with their music loving cousins) revolted by pirating the ebooks in one way or another, e.g. getting them free from file-sharing sites.

Publishers should listen to their customers! When they think a price is too high they will go elsewhere or pirate it.

'Once record companies put a reasonable price on their products, the vast majority of buyers gave up piracy and started paying for their music. The same can happen with eBooks.'

Ed Hardy, writing for Tablet PC Review, says:

Book Publishers Must Learn the Same Lessons Music Publishers Did


Last week, the U.S. Justice Dept. sued some of the world's largest publishers as well as Apple, accusing them of eBook price fixing. This lawsuit wouldn't be necessary if eBook publishers would learn the lessons that music publishers did a decade ago.


As it stands now, publishing companies like MacMillan, HarperCollins, Penguin, Simon & Schuster, and others want to charge more for the digital versions of books than most of their customers think they are worth. These companies frequently price eBooks the same, or just below, the printed versions. Few of their customers see the logic in this -- publishing a book electronically removes the costs of printing, shipping, and storing a physical object.

The argument the publishers make in response is that the majority of the cost of a book isn't in printing it, but rather in their overhead of paying authors and editors, advertising, etc. The answer this this is clear: if they don't find ways to significantly lower their overhead, these companies are going to be out of business in a few years.

Learn from the Past

There is another industry that was in a similar situation a few years ago: the music business. Around the turn of the millennium, the Apple iPod had made the CD obsolete, and consumers wanted to buy MP3s. The music publishers didn't want to sell these -- they liked being able to force people to buy a whole CD in order to get the one or two songs they actually wanted.

Consumers felt they were being ripped off, and turned to pirating songs instead of buying them. The music industry struggled for years... until record companies finally bit the bullet and started selling songs in digital formats at reasonable prices. Now, people are buying more tracks than ever and the music industry is healthy again.

History Repeating Itself

Book publishers must learn from music producers. Currently, when their customers complain that eBooks are too expensive compared to the security of owning the printed version of a work, the publishers tell them to buy the printed book -- as if that was the only other option.

Read and learn more

Get Writers Welcome Blog on your Kindle :)))

Are App Developers Publishers?

Skulls: book-app from publisher Touch Press

Many apps have contributed greatly to digital book publishing (introducing multimedia and interactive features for example) and paved the road to modern publishing ... AND have already staked out out future paths for publishing to expand in.

So, are app publishers true publishers or developers?

Now I know many people get hung up on definitions of terms, especially when those same people have been brought up in  certain older environments where terms had more singular meanings ... before the advent of newer technologies that have possibly broadened meanings.  

Here is an interesting article by Stuart Dredge in the Apps Blog of The Guardian:

Touch Press talks digital publishing, Kindle Fire and inspirational book-apps

'We have broken into the Garden of Eden, and it's upon us to take advantage of that opportunity,' says Max Whitby

2011 has been a fascinating year for book-apps, as publishers and developers experimented with multimedia and interactive features, and wrestled with the challenge of selling enough apps to recoup the investment in those features.

The Elements remains the biggest success story of the book-apps world. Its publisher Touch Press has sold more than 250,000 downloads of its flagship iOS app, bringing in more than $2m of revenues for the company according to chief executive Max Whitby.

It has been followed by a succession of book-apps from the firm, including Solar System and The Waste Land in partnership with book publisher Faber, and recently X is for X-Ray and Skulls by Simon Winchester under its own steam.

Touch Press is a transatlantic collaboration, with an office in the UK headed by Whitby, and two high-profile co-founders – Theodore Gray and Stephen Wolfram – in the US. 2011 has seen the company grow to a staff of 25 people, having raised a second round of funding in the summer.

"Quality is the heart of what we do," says Whitby, explaining why the company has grown relatively slowly. "Our relationship with Apple is only as good as our last title. The day we ship a crap title will be a sad day. That constrains how fast we can go."

Right from the start, Touch Press has presented itself as a publisher rather than an app developer – something that Whitby says meets with mixed reactions from the book publishing industry.

"The world of publishing divides between companies like Faber who understand that the way to work with us is as a partner and jointly make something as a team, and those who just see us as an anoraky developer who can do stuff at a price. We just don't do that: it's not the way you make something interesting and new."

Touch Press' founding team were in the right place with the right backgrounds when Apple launched its iPad in 2010. Wolfram and Gray had worked together on advanced computing system Mathematica, while Whitby was involved in the BBC's Interactive Television Unit in the heyday of CD-ROM, eventually leading a management buyout of the unit to form his own multimedia publishing company.

Read and learn more

Get Writers Welcome Blog on your Kindle :)))

The Web is Dead? Say What?

Some experts and execs in media are saying the web is dead (RE digital publishing)...That the relay wand has been passed from the "open web" to the "app Internet."

Pure cow chips!

The main reason the open web will thrive and grow in offering good published works is the consumers never-ending pursuit of the cheapest (or most value) content in lieu of paying more for piled-on-costs items such as Apple's required in-app purchases and 30% cut for selling!

This insight from FOLIO magazine's "Login Section":

THE WEB IS DEAD?

Execs say the torch has passed to the "app Internet."

There was a question during a session at the DeSilva+Phillips Media Dealmakers Summit last month that crystallized what a lot of people are thinking about the future. "Are tablets and e-readers the future of media?"

For George F. Colony, CEO of Forrester Research, the answer was simple: "Yes. These devices are the nexus of media."

"Not only are tablets the future," Colony said, "but We think the Web is dead." "It may always be there," he said, "but it's not the future." "Nor are e-readers--devices like Amazon's Kindle." "There's one advantage to those things and that's that they can be read on the beach," he said. "That's not enough."

Not surprisingly, not everyone agreed. Some of the comments provoked strong response from FOLIO readers.

"Baloney," said Eric Shanfelt, founder of e-Media Strategist Inc. "The Web is thriving, growing and not even at full maturity yet, let alone being dead. Apps are a piece of the media puzzle, but the real money for media companies is still in Web and e-mail and will be for a long time to come."

Open-sourced, Web-based solutions remain attractive. "Apple's actions--essentially turning the eBook and eMagazine businesses on their head by requiring in-app purchases and a 30 percent cut for Apple--demonstrate why Colony and Forrester are wrong," said Len Feldman, author of The Feldman File Blog. "So long as Apple, or any company, can change the rules without warning, there's a strong incentive to use the Web as an open alternative."

And how many can afford to give up print? "The question that should have been asked of the attendees was: "How many of you will still be in business a year from now if all your print and event revenues went away today?" wrote one reader. "Those that raised their hands were the people that should have been on the discussion panel."

Remember, visitors, you can get the Writers Welcome Blog on your Kindle here...

Publishing Piracy Intrigue: China Stepping on Japan Copyrights...Oh, and Apple is Bad Boy Too!

Not only is China violating some of Japan's copyrights through it's huge internet search beast Baidu (on it's Baidu library)...but, Apple iPad is also stomping all over portions of Japanese copyrighted material.

And guess what? The Chinese Baidu search beast has made a successful effort at policing it's copyright infringements whereas Apple has NOT! Interesting, no?

This intriguing story unfolds on the Japan & China 'Realtime' Report blogs of the Wall Street Journal:

The publishing business may be in the throes of the unknown, but one thing is for sure: Japanese publishing giants aren’t afraid to pick up the sword – or pen — in the name of copyright protection.

The consortium of four Japanese publishing associations that joined forces to take on Apple Inc. has expanded the reach of their sword to China. The associations requested Baidu, the beast of Internet search in China, to take steps to prevent illegal uploads of copyrighted material on “Baidu Library.” In the absence of effective policing and preventive tactics pirated versions of Japanese manga, anime and novels have run rampant on the free document-sharing service where users can upload and surf files for free, according to a joint press release on Monday. It was signed by the Japan Book Publishers Association, the Japan Magazine Publishers Association, the Electronic Book Publishers Association of Japan and the Digital Comic Association.

“Authors and publishers have made removal requests to Baidu each time the existence of these ‘digital bootlegs’ is discovered, but there is no end to the illegal uploading of data and the cat-and-mouse-game continues,” said the statement, adding that “Baidu bears grave responsibility for this problem.”

Read and learn more

Apple's Policies Downright Orwellian

More on Apple's subscription policy for publishers.

There is another slant to Apple's bad subscription policy for publishers; one I hadn't contemplated until I read yet another piece on this head-knocker issue by Larry Magid in MercuryNews.com.

Simply put, Steve Jobs, by the level of control he wants to exert, wants to tell the rest of us what we can and can't download on his devices. He is acting like the supremo censor king!...And it will hurt his business in the future.

In my opinion, Mr. Jobs should get back to the business of improving and facilitating the internet with top quality products and remove all roadblocks to designers to create apps that will further enhance his core products...Good for his business...Good for sharpening his competitive edge...Good for all of us.

Excerpt from Magid's article: "That level of control has allowed Apple to censor apps for a variety of reasons, ranging from duplication of existing apps to its efforts to keep porn and malware from being used on its products. While that latter motivation may seem noble, it's also presumptuous. Steve Jobs has a perfect right to keep legal adult content away from his own devices and those of his minor children, but I don't see why he has a right to decide for the rest of us."

The key word here is 'presumptuous' and Mr. Jobs has to escape this kind of arrogance.

From MercuryNews by Larry Magid:

Apple, Google offer publishers competing online payment systems

Google and Apple last week announced competing online payment systems to allow publishers to charge for content on digital devices. Apple's system is designed to work with the iPhone, iPad and iPod touch, while Google announced its will work with "tablets, smartphones and websites." Presumably most of the tablets and phones will be running Google's Android operating system but it's possible that its system will also work on other mobile platforms.

One difference between the Apple and Google platforms is that Apple will charge publishers 30 percent of the subscription revenue while Google plans to keep only 10 percent. But perhaps more important distinction is the way the two companies plan to handle customer data.

On its website, Apple said that "customers purchasing a subscription through the App Store will be given the option of providing the publisher with their name, email address and zip code when they subscribe." The key word is option. By default, only Apple will have that information. Google, which in general takes a more open approach to developers, will reportedly pass that information on to publishers.

The issue of access to customer information is important to the publishing industry, according to Nina Link, CEO of MPA -- The Association of Magazine Media. In an interview, she said that "publishers have historically had relationships directly with the consumer and have access to data as they renew them year after year and as they offer them additional products that are targeted to their interests."

Read and learn more

Get this blog on your Kindle Here

Sports Illustrated's All-Inclusive Print/Digital Subscription Plan

Excerpt from Mashable: ... "At a press event in New York City Friday, Sports Illustrated and parent company Time Inc. announced a new subscription plan that spans the web, and several major mobile and tablet devices — excluding, notably, the iPhone and the iPad."

Make special note of the last phrase above...it spills forth an intriguing issue discussed in some of my previous posts of late.

Although this post is interesting and informative (if I do say so myself) on it's own...please read my yesterday's post on Publishing/Writing: Insights, News, Intrigue Blog (Time, Inc. Tells Apple iPad:‘Screw You!’), and the links therein, for more juicy background.

From Mashable by Lauren Indvik:

Will Sports Illustrated’s Subscription Plan Rescue Digital Magazine Sales?

At a press event in New York City Friday, Sports Illustrated and parent company Time Inc. announced a new subscription plan that spans the web, and several major mobile and tablet devices — excluding, notably, the iPhone and the iPad.

To subscribe, Sports Illustrated readers will need to elect one of two subscription options at si.com/magazine (see below), and then download the apps through the Android Marketplace. Google will take an undisclosed cut of sales, Time EVP and Chief Digital Offer Randall Rothenberg said.

The subscription options are as follows:

Print/Digital Bundle: Print delivery plus full access to web content, and apps for Android-powered tablets (currently only the Galaxy Tab) and smartphones. Costs $4.99 per month, or $48 per year

Digital Only: Full access to web content, and apps for tablets and smartphones running Android. Costs $3.99 per month

Current print subscribers will have free access to all digital properties through the end of their current plan. Those who prefer to read Sports Illustrated on their iPhones or iPads can continue to purchase and download single issues of the magazine through the apps [iTunes link] designated for each device.

Read and learn more

Remember, you can get Writers Welcome Blog on your Kindle at http://alturl.com/xymdy

More on Apple's Dictatorial Asininity

Please read my two posts on the Publishing/Writing: Insights, News, Intrigue Blog RE specific Apple issues with publishers' content management for background on this post.

Apple is further restricting access apps for other than Apple devices (e-readers, tablets, etc) to read mags and newspapers to be offered through their iStore...even to the point of forcing some to have to buy Apple's own iPad tablet if they want to read the iStore offerings.

At least, that is the way this humble boob interprets the situation.

In my past posts, referenced above, I discussed Apple's outrageous fee (30%) charged to publishers who want to sell their content through the iStore, AND the fact that Apple did not want to share the subscribers data with the publishers...A BIG mistake.

Me thinks Apple is getting too big for it's britches...and they should stick to selling devices and not messing with content and all it derives.

Wonder if Apple's deal with Rupert Murdoch's "The Daily" has influenced the "money-grabbing" messy management?

Apple is definitely not the only kid on the tablet block anymore (and probably doesn't even have the best tablet computer!) with the introduction of Motorola's Xoom among others.

I believe Apple is managing itself into the cellar...and they will need a completely "new device" to start over again. They are taking the bite out of their own apple!

Matt Kinsman, managing editor of FOLIO magazine, has more details RE Apple's tightening grip on content sales:

Apple Rejects Sony Reader App, Tightens Grip on Content Sales
From now on, all in-app purchases must go through Apple.

Apple has reportedly rejected Sony's reader app from the App store for selling content within the app and letting customers make purchases outside the App store (such as within the Sony Reader Store, according to The New York Times.

From now on, all in-app purchases have to go through Apple, according to Steve Haber, president of Sony's digital reading division. "It's the opposite of what we wanted to bring to the market," Haber is quoted as saying by The Drum. "We always wanted to bring the content to as many devices as possible, not one device to one store."

The news comes the day before Apple and News Corp. are supposed to debut News Corp.'s new digital magazine The Daily, and many observers predict Apple will use that opportunity to unveil a new subscription system.

Read and learn more

iPad Falling Behind in the "Savior of Publishing" Race - And Rightfully So!

Holy shitswowski! What's going on with Apple and it's stupid approach to putting up roadblocks to potential magazine and newspaper publishing clients in it's iTunes Store RE handling of subscriptions?

Many popular magazine and newspaper iPad apps have already been developed to allow selling digital versions through Apple...AND the so-called Apple visionaries (idiots is more like it) are not allowing the personal information of subscribers to be accessed and managed by the content providers themselves!

Why? What is the purpose of this greedy hoarding? This should be a win-win situation for all parties to be more monetarily successful. The more direct use of personal demographic info will result in more targeted success for the newspaper and mag clients AND should result in more volume biz for the Apple iTunes Store.

Can someone with more insight than I explain this to me?

If Apple stays on this dumb course I think the popular mags and newspapers will take their business elsewhere. And where is that, you might ask? To the upcoming and surging Google and Android platforms, of course!

Also, Apple is demanding too damn much of a cut (30%) to allow the apps! Remember that great line from the New York gubernatorial campaign: The rent is too damn high!

Read these previous posts of mine for more background on this issue:

From this blog, Time Magazine is Unhappy with iPad Publishing

From Writers Thought for Today Blog, Publishers Becoming Wary of Apple

Here is a current little ditty on iPad News: Apple, Publishers Clash on Subscriptions from iPad.net :

The iPad has been looked upon as the “savior” of the publishing industry, but relations between Apple and major publishers have hit an impasse that may be insurmountable. If the two cannot agree on key issues, the publishers may be taking their business elsewhere.

We’ve been hearing rumors for months that iPad apps for numerous popular magazine and newspaper titles will become available for subscriptions at the iTunes Store. Now the reasons for the delay have surfaced. According to Peter Kafka at MediaMemo, Apple and the publishers are “still miles apart” when it comes to the terms for how to sell subscriptions.

Read and enjoy more

Apple to App Developers: Screw You RE Guidelines!

The supposedly new guidelines (some say with 'relaxed' restrictions) for app developers for use in the App Store are anything but. Essentially Apple is saying: "submit your new apps to us but we will decide if you cross any lines (undefined by us) and will reject at will."

For software developers, the new ability to use third-party frameworks and toolkits is a good thing...But, from a content writers point-of-view, Apple may be positioning themselves to reject ideas as well as just bad code.

This excellent analysis by Scott Rosenberg, author of Say Everything and Dreaming in Code, is from his Wordyard blog:

For all of you out there in media-land who still think that the iPad represents salvation for old business models and who welcome the App Store as a new platform for distributing content, I recommend a reading of Apple’s new App Store Review Guidelines as helpfully summarized by Daring Fireball’s John Gruber. (It seems you have to be a registered Apple developer before you can actually read the guidelines in full, but they’re available at Gizmodo.)

Discussion of these guidelines in the tech press initially framed the move as a “relaxation” of Apple’s policies, because the company will now allow developers to use third-party frameworks and toolkits. But view the guidelines from the perspective of content publishing and “relaxation” is not the word that will spring to mind.

This item stands out:

We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, “I’ll know it when I see it”. And we think that you will also know it when you cross it.

Read more http://alturl.com/y7oqk

Who's Winning the E-book War--Amazon or Apple?

We all know that Apple's iPad sold 3.3 million units since it's introduction in April. The purposefully cloudy reporting of Amazon's earning figures make their Kindle sales harder to discern (we don't want our competition to know type thing)...Hummmm, the whole Kindle reporting method seems cloudy to me, as well as Amazon's motives and agenda. But, their single-function Kindle is still selling like hotcakes and is on back-order for now...I just can't help but wonder, though, if it's days aren't numbered against the multi-functional iPads and future clones.

Randall Stross writes this for the New York Times:

THE Kindle from Amazon.com is designed to let us do one thing very well: read. To survive, it must excel at this, not only by jostling to stay a nose ahead of other e-readers, but also by maintaining an enormous lead over the Apple iPad and its coming competitors. The multipurpose iPad can do thousands of things very well; used for reading book-length texts, it doesn’t excel, but it’s passable.

Last month, Amazon introduced a pair of third-generation machines — smaller, lighter and with crisper text. One has a new, lower entry price of $139. “I predict there will be a 10th-generation and a 20th-generation Kindle,” said Jeffrey P. Bezos, Amazon’s chief executive. If that sounds a tad defensive, it’s probably because of the instant success of the multipurpose iPad: 3.3 million units sold since its introduction in April.

We know how many iPads were sold because Apple is straightforward about reporting the unit sales of all of its products. Amazon is a different story. We don’t know the size of Amazon’s Kindle business because the company is averse to disclosing details of its operations. When it reports its financial results, the company that sells just about anything that can be put in a box or sent electronically divides its businesses into just three categories: “media,” which lumps books, music and videos into one indistinguishable agglomeration; “electronics and other general merchandise,” an even larger, indistinguishable agglomeration; and “other.”

Read more http://alturl.com/q8kmb

Time Magazine is Unhappy with iPad Publishing

Is Apple screwing with it's publishers? Seems so according to this report by Matt Hartley
writing for cooltechzone :

Considering all of the hype built up around the iPad’s potential influence with the print media, one might think they’d be a little more happy about what it could do for them. No such luck. Seems that there are publishers out there that feel that the iPad spells real trouble for their own efforts, despite any previously conceived ideas of mutual benefit.

AllThingsDigital reports that Time Inc. is up in arms over how Apple is handling the way Time offers subscriptions to their users. In short, Apple says no dice. That’s correct, Apple is not allowing Time to manage their subscriptions they way the publisher would like. This means Time is not handling the money going back and forth, despite Apple allowing others such as Amazon to do this early on.

For comments to this piece go to original article http://alturl.com/qrbr8

E-books Sales Up - Print Books Maintaining

Another view that puts print books in proper perspective...They are still a strong force.

Bob Hoover , of the Pittsburg Post-Gazette, writes this intuitive piece that points out some figures that are sometimes ignored or forgotten:

Amazon, the online retailer, has been selling its Kindle digital book reader for nearly three years now, one of a handful of these electronic devices, including the recent Apple iPad that combines a bunch of "applications" that the other digital readers lack.

Despite the makers' suggestions that the device will make the old-fashioned print book extinct, it seems clear, for some time to come, at least, that these "appliances" are alternatives to books, not replacements.

My two-week experience with a Kindle last year convinced me that it's fine for reading straightforward narrative fiction and nonfiction while traveling, but it's a cold, impersonal experience for a "dinosaur" like myself, not raised on computer screens.

And, it's the screen itself that limits the eyes from roaming around unlike a standard book with its two-page view, as though you are inhabiting the story rather than getting it in restricted chunks.

No matter. E-book readers are selling well. Apple said last week it had sold 3.27 million iPads since April. Amazon said Kindle sales have tripled. Sony chimed in as well, claiming to have scored 10 million book sales at its online download store.

What boosted those sales was price cuts. Barnes & Noble sells a Nook model for $149; Amazon dropped the Kindle from $259 to $189 recently.

Amazon raised the level of its aggressive marketing strategy last week when it announced that e-book sales have surpassed print book totals on its website.

"Over the past month, for every 100 hardcover books Amazon.com has sold, it has sold 180 Kindle books," the company said.

Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO, called the event "the tipping point" for digital books, meaning his company's digital-book department and its Kindle.

Perhaps we should place that claim into perspective.

As Michael Cader of the trade observer Publishers Lunch pointed out, sales of print books last year were 205 million, a number that must reduce digital book numbers to insignificance at this point -- if we had those figures, but Amazon won't provide specific numbers, either for book or Kindle sales.

Read more http://alturl.com/dsbfw

British Publishers Ink Deals with Apple

More intrigue in publishing with the iPad's coming-out party in England...Some previously committed publishers to Apple delayed final acceptance until the last minute! Talk about a last minute prom date...

Four big English publishers finally signed with the iPad agency pricing model and had ebooks in the Apple iBookStore today at the iPad overseas launch...

This report from TheBookSeller.com by Catherine Neilan:

Hachette UK, Penguin, HarperCollins and Pan Macmillan are the only British publishers to have inked deals with Apple, with e-books produced by all companies appearing on the iBookStore this morning (28th) and available to UK book buyers.

The four represent five of the original global publishers who signed with Apple before its US launch in April—only Simon & Schuster is currently missing. Between them, they account for roughly 36% of the UK books market.

Man Booker-winner Wolf Hall (Fourth Estate), David Mitchell's number one The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet (Sceptre) and Stephen Gately's The Tree of Seasons are available to buy with prices ranging from £11.99 to £9.99 for hardbacks and £6.99 to £3.99 for paperbacks.

Prices are in the main more expensive than the equivalent print versions available on Amazon.co.u. For example, the paperback of Wolf Hall is £3.60 on Amazon, but £6.99 on the iBookStore. Thousand Autumns... is £11.99 via Apple, but Amazon is charging £9.41 for the hardback.

However, readers can download more than 100 pages of Wolf Hall for free, with an option to buy it while reading the sample. Nearly 100 pages of Mitchell's novel can also be downloaded for free.

Tony Parsons, Jeremy Clarkson, Chris Evans and Frankie Boyle are all among other authors appearing on the virtual bookshelf. Currently, Evans' memoir It's Not What You Think is number one.

Freelance writer Ben Johncock, who already owns an iPad, said: "There is a huge selection on here, with titles from all the genres - there is a really good sample of work available." He added: "I was a bit worred there would be nothing on here but there is actually quite a bit."

Read more at http://alturl.com/uomc

Apple Overtakes Microsoft ??

Apple finally is worth a tad more than Microsoft...primarily due to the iPod, iPhone and iPad...

Does anyone really give a damn?...I mean, I don't care as long as both companies keep on the edge of discovery and innovation to bring the best experience to their customers...They do this and they will continue in success.

Interesting notes on the capitalization of these two companies by Sharon Chan, Seattle Times technology reporter:

It was the day a million iPads trumped a billion PCs.

On Wednesday, Apple passed Microsoft to become the world's most valuable technology company based on market capitalization.

While the two may end up trading positions for weeks and months to come, the unseating of the Redmond software giant captures the rise of consumer gadgets over workhorse corporate software.

Microsoft continually has dismissed Apple for its single-digit percentage of the PC market. With the launch of the iPod, iPhone and iPad, however, the Cupertino, Calif.-based company has continually dazzled Wall Street traders with the new, new thing.

Traders appear somewhat bored by Windows and Office, even if the software continues to rake in billions of dollars.

As Roger Sterling said in the TV show "Mad Men" about ad accounts, "Old business is just old business."

Microsoft stock fell 4 percent Wednesday to close at $25.01, which figures out to a market capitalization of $219.1 billion. Apple stock fell 0.5 percent to close at $244.11, giving the company a market capitalization of $222.1 billion.

Market capitalization is the share price times outstanding shares, a common measure of how much the stock market values a company.

"It's mostly symbolic," said Matt Rosoff, analyst at Directions on Microsoft, an independent research firm in Kirkland. "Apple built a lot of new businesses; they've been able to be successful in those businesses. They also started from a smaller base."

To compare the two company's financial performance, Microsoft had $14.6 billion in profit on $58.4 billion in sales in fiscal 2009. It says 1 billion people use Windows.

Apple had a profit of $5.7 billion on $36.5 billion in sales in fiscal 2009.

Microsoft is trading at a stock price 12.83 times earnings, also known as a price-to-earnings ratio. Apple's stock is trading at 24 times earnings.

The wide gap is a sign of Wall Street's faith in Apple's future potential earnings and that its stock will continue to leap and bound.

Microsoft's price-to-earnings ratio represents the sentiment that the company has less room to grow.

"Microsoft has a slightly slower growth profile that's reflected in the valuation," said Sid Parakh, analyst at McAdams Wright Ragen. His 12-month price target for Microsoft is $38 a share.

The drop in Microsoft's stock comes on the heels of Tuesday's news that two video-game veterans are leaving the company. Robbie Bach, president of the Entertainment and Devices division, is retiring, and J Allard, a senior vice president in the division, is leaving but will remain a consultant for Chief Executive Steve Ballmer.

The company's stock had been dropping through May after trading near a 12-month high in April.

Apple and CEO Steve Jobs have been riding a high, launching the iPad tablet device in April and selling 1 million units since. The iPad represents a triumph of sorts over Microsoft, which had the head start many years ago with its work on tablet PCs.

Going back over the past decade, though, Microsoft's stock has hovered between $24 and $34 a share, while Apple's stock has risen from less than $10 to more than $200 a share.

In 1997, Microsoft stepped in to help Apple with a $150 million investment, when its rival was trading at $7 a share.

"Microsoft stock price has pingponged for the past 10 years. It hasn't really gone up or down," Rosoff said. "Apple's has gone up significantly."

Analysts say the market capitalization will not fundamentally change how Microsoft will do business. The company declined to comment, but executives have said in the past that all they can do is focus on execution, not the stock market.

"I don't think the notion of their market cap being slightly lower than Apple's is going to fundamentally drive how they run that business," Parakh said.

The only thing Microsoft can do is to make products that consumers like, such as Windows 7, he said. "Clearly it just boils down to long-term strategy execution."

Update 11:41 a.m.:

The gap had narrowed again as of mid-day Thursday.

Microsoft stock is up a few percentage points in intraday trading to $26 per share, pushing its market capitalization up to $228 billion and closing the gap with Apple. Shares of apple were also up a few percentage points to around $252, making its market capitalization $229.4 billion.

Sharon Pian Chan: 206-464-2958 or schan@seattletimes.com. Follow me on Twitter @sharonpianchan

In This Corner: Nokia!...In Opposite Corner: Apple!

More intrigue in the electronics underworld...

"Just who the hell came up with the iPhone and iPad tech first?" asks Dr. Watson. "Nokia or Apple?"

"Ah ha, that is the question." murmurs Sherlock..."It seems all these lawsuits and counter-lawsuits are muddying up the bloody picture!"

"Take a look, Watson, at this article from the Associated Press in The New York Times":

The Finnish cellphone maker Nokia Corporation said on Friday that it had extended its patent-infringement claims against Apple to include the new iPad.

The latest complaint, filed in United States District Court in Madison, Wis., follows other lawsuits by Nokia claiming that a broad swath of Apple products violate Nokia patents. Nokia says the disputed technologies help reduce the size and cost of electronic gadgets. Apple has already responded with its own infringement claims against Nokia.

Apple has also sued the HTC Corporation of Taiwan, one of the leading producers of cellphones that run on Google’s Android software, a potential challenger to Apple’s popular iPhone. Apple says HTC’s Android phones violate iPhone patents.

Nokia’s latest lawsuit is aimed at the iPhone and the iPad 3G, the version of the device that can connect to the Web using cellphone networks. Nokia said the gadgets infringe five patents related to technology that makes voice and data communications more efficient, allowing the devices to be more compact.

An Apple spokesman, Steve Dowling, declined to comment on the new case but said the company had already filed a countersuit in December to earlier claims by Nokia. Apple claims Nokia is infringing on 13 of its patents, saying the company chose to “copy the iPhone” to recapture its share of the high-end phone market.

"Clear as mud, eh?" asks Sherlock.

"Huumph, I see what you mean, Ole Chap." mutters Watson.

This true life intrigue will be continued...

Google eBook Service "Google Editions" Coming This Summer

Good ole Google is entering into the eBook market with a program that will be available through ANY computing device! How about that??...

Here is a report by Sarah Lai Stirland (pictured at left), Assistant Managing Editor of BroadbandBreakfast dot com:

Google plans on launching its open eBook service Google Editions by June or July, according to a Tuesday report in the Wall Street Journal.

Google Wants To Open Up the Market For Digital Books
Google’s manager for strategic partner development Chris Palma disclosed the company’s plans during a Tuesday morning panel discussion sponsored by the Book Industry Study Group in New York City. The panel discussion focused on cloud computing and the business of publishing.
Unlike Apple and Amazon’s eBook services, Google’s will be available through any computing device. The launch of the service appears to have been delayed by the negotiations over the different visions between Google and the publishing industry over how its service should function.

The Journal story says that the service will allow readers to both buy digital books directly from Google as well as from book retailers’ web sites. The pricing of the books will be closely watched as the publishing industry has fought Amazon’s push to sell books for a flat $9.99 on its electronic book device the Kindle.

Consumers have already downloaded more then 1.5 million eBooks through Apple’s new iBookstore, according to a company statement issued Monday. Apple sold its millionth iPad on Friday after just a month of its launch, according to the statement. TechCrunch reports that Amazon has sold around three million Kindles as of this January. The company first released the product in late 2007.

The future of digital book licensing and the separate issue of the impact of the Google’s book search settlement will be discussed at the inaugural Intellectual Property Breakfast Club meeting May 11 in Washington, DC. The panelists include: Jonathan Band, counsel for the Library Copyright Alliance, Michael Capobianco, vice president of the Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America and Sherwin Siy, Public Knowledge’s deputy legal director.

Now if they’ll only make a water-resistant book device that can brought to the beach. Perhaps they could charge a premium.

Ipad Kinks Start to Emerge!

After a first day of bombastic sales and the consumers have been in the trenches of operating the iPad; the imperfections, as they always do with new technology, are breaking into the forefront!

Gregg Keizer, of Computerworld, reports on the first cluster-mucks of the iPad:


Wi-Fi issues dominate iPad user complaints

Some owners of Apple's new iPad have complained of weak wireless signals, dropped connections and slow surfing speeds, messages on the company's support forum show.

Although users have also reported problems with recharging their iPads from Windows-based PCs or synchronizing the tablet with other computers, Wi-Fi issues have garnered the most complaints, as tallied by the message counts on multiple support forum threads.

As of late Monday, the thread titled "Weak wifi" leads all others with more than 130 messages, and nearly 13,000 views.

"Signal is weak, downloading anything is painfully slow and it will drop the signal and go offline every 5-10 minutes," said a user identified as "mbell75" early Sunday, near the beginning of the thread. "Pretty annoying."

"It will work fine for a while, but show a low signal. Then, after a few minutes of use, my connection will drop completely and I will have to reset my wi-fi radio," complained "mlp8104" in a message Monday afternoon.

The biggest beef was that the iPad's Wi-Fi signal indicator would fluctuate, going from full-strength to the lowest level without warning, or any change in the tablet's location.

"My wifi went down to 1 bar after working great for a few hours," said "syunker" Monday. "My download speeds started to crawl, I couldn't even surf the web. I rebooted my router and it didn't help."

Several users said their iPads could not acquire a signal, or only a faint signal, while other devices, including new Apple laptops and iPhones, had no similar trouble. "In our living room where laptops get a full signal, my iPad gets a very poor signal which is so bad that it even cuts completely out sometimes," complained "Panjandrum" Monday morning. "I had to walk the iPad into the same room as my router to get a movie rental to download."

As is often the case on Apple's support threads, users hoped that a software update to the iPad's operating system would not only solve their problems, but be released soon.

Others, however, chimed in to say that they were perfectly happy with their iPads' Wi-Fi signal, which was strong and stable at home, work and in public hotspots at locations such as Starbucks.

Some who reported that their iPads intermittently lost a Wi-Fi connection said that they solved the problem temporarily by shutting down the iPad, then restarting it. "But should I have to do that with a device that costs this much and has so much hype about changing the way we use the Net?" asked "sandersn" on Sunday in a different thread.

Monday, Apple posted several iPad-specific support documents to its Web site, including one that suggested users modify settings on their wireless routers. Another troubleshooting document told users to "Move closer to the Wi-Fi router or hotspot," if they were having problems.

Suggestions from users ranged from disabling the iPad's "Ask to Join Networks" feature to rebooting routers.

Connectivity issues aren't new for Apple hardware. Shortly after the company's ultra-thin MacBook Air debuted in early 2008, owners complained about weak signals when their notebooks' lids were closed. iPhone owners have complained about poor reception and lost signals over AT&T's data network since the smartphone first appeared in 2007, to the point that several filed class-action lawsuits against both Apple and the carrier.

The version of the iPad now for sale connects to the Internet only via Wi-Fi; a more expensive model that also uses AT&T's 3G data network is not slated to ship until later this month.

Over the weekend, users voiced frustration at other problems, including an apparent inability to recharge the iPad through USB ports on many computers, keyboards and hubs. On Saturday, for example, Consumer Reports said that its initial testing indicated that the iPad would recharge via the USB ports on desktop and laptop Macs, but failed to do so on USB ports in a variety of Windows PCs, or through the ports on a keyboard directly connected to a Mac.

(Computerworld noticed the same "Not Charging" message when an iPad was connected to the USB port on a wired Mac keyboard.)

Apple clarified the recharging process in a support document published Sunday, noting that the iPad requires a high-power USB 2.0 port to charge while it is in use. The iPad will only charge via older USB ports, including those on most Windows machines, when the tablet is asleep, Apple said.

Apple began selling iPads Saturday at its own retail stores and Best Buy. On Monday, the company announced it had sold 300,000 iPads the first day.

Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld. Follow Gregg on Twitter at @gkeizer or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed . His e-mail address is gkeizer@ix.netcom.com.

Ipad's First-day Sales Top 300,000

The tablet computer's debut Saturday topped that of the original iPhone in 2007. The company also reports that 1 million apps and 250,000 e-books were downloaded.

If the iPad starting price is $499 that means Apple's first day sales were at least $150 million! Ohhhh, if only I could make 5%!!!

David Sarno, who writes on technology for the LA Times, reports on the earnings:

For Apple Inc. and its iPad, the easy part is over.

After months of marketing hype that had fans grabbing their wallets this weekend, Apple announced Monday that it sold more than 300,000 of its new tablet computers Saturday -- a one-day total that topped the 2007 debut for the original iPhone.

While the Cupertino company did not release total sales figures for the holiday weekend as of Monday morning, analysts predicted shoppers would snap up more than 4 million units by the end of the year.

The company also said that, as of 12:01 a.m. Sunday, consumers had downloaded more than 1 million applications -- the small programs users can add to their devices -- and nearly 250,000 e-books from the company's iBookstore online marketplace.

Despite the robust start, given the country's economic malaise and the iPad's hefty price tag, analysts warned that questions linger as to when -- or if -- there will be similar mass-market adoption of the tablet as there has been of Apple's blockbuster iPod and iPhone devices. (The iPhone 3GS sold 1 million units in its first three days last year.)

They also point out that the initial rush of customers would be dominated by early adopters or Apple enthusiasts, who might be more forgiving of the fact that the company may not have worked out all of the kinks -- or found a so-called killer app.

"Apple reached first base," said Francis Sideco, an analyst at iSuppli Corp., an El Segundo research firm. Now, he added, "they've got to go get everyone else."

Some prospective buyers may be waiting until the end of the month for the 3G version of the iPad, which will cost up to $829 but can be used more like a smart phone. That could pose a problem down the road for Apple, according to analysts, who say the company must also walk a careful line with its iPad to ensure the device doesn't eat into sales of its popular line of laptops or iPhones.

But none of those concerns tempered Apple executives' glee at the consumer turnout.

"It feels great to have the iPad launched into the world," Chief Executive Steve Jobs said in a statement. "It's going to be a game changer."

Nearly 3,300 apps specifically developed for the iPad are available so far, one-third of them games, said Colin Sebastian, an analyst with Lazard Capital Markets.

More apps were sure to come, he said, because "as long as the iPad keeps selling, you're going to see a lot more innovation on this platform."

The frenzied start-up mentality that ruled Silicon Valley in dot-com boom times is again taking hold, with thousands of software developers scrambling to stake an early claim in the iPad gold rush. Experience has taught them that the potential riches can be huge, particularly for those developers that get in early: The apps market for the iPhone and iPod Touch together top $1 billion in annual sales.

According to bestseller charts at Apple's iTunes store, consumers grabbed a movie-viewer from Netflix Inc. (free) and a digital book reader from Good.iWare Ltd. (99 cents). SketchBook Pro, a touch-screen drawing app, made the iPad's top 10 download list, selling 10,000 copies at $7.99 each, according to maker Autodesk Inc.

Most of these apps were developed after Apple announced its plans to release the tablet in late January. Few software builders were given access to the device, so most developers had to resort to creative alternatives.

"We actually had paper cut-outs of iPads to start the design process, to imagine what holding one would be like," said Chris Cheung, the product manager in charge of the SketchBook Pro app.

Fans said they were happy, even giddy, days after their purchase. Aimee Willis had her husband playing baby-sitter most of the weekend so she could play with her new toy.

"It's completely mind-blowing and insane," said Willis, of West Hollywood. "I've pretty much been on it every free moment since."

But Apple took some licks as well: At least one fan tried to tap into the iPad mania on YouTube -- by being the first to pointlessly smash one on camera.

Justin Kocott uploaded a video Sunday of himself and friends destroying the $499 device with a baseball bat Sunday. Less than 24 hours later, it had been viewed 280,000 times.

He said he was surprised to be accused of being an Apple hater.

"Not even. We still have two other iPads, plus my family has iPhones, Macs and iPods," said Kocott, 19, a Pittsburgh high school student.

"I love Apple, actually."

david.sarno@latimes.com