Thank you, Pratik, for giving me some background and allaying some of my concerns. I have to admit that I am not a trusting person by nature and tend to accept changes and new ideas slowly. I'm trying to reach beyond my own reaction to this to understand how someone else may see this. I think I must be confused about something though. Doesn't the current copyright amendment cover textbooks just like regular books? Also, with several universities actively scanning the content of their libraries under the Google umbrella, aren't textbooks going digital now so students can access them? I understand that publishers want everyone to buy copies of their books instead of us getting them through Bookshare and don't like not getting paid. That's just good business sense for them. So while I can see the benefit to the publishers, is there one for us? What I can't fully grasp is from a disabled reader's point of view, why should we want to embrace a policy that would seem to cause even greater delays in getting access to books? Instead of books being scanned and processed right away, organizations like Bookshare would have to check with the publisher's office to see if a work is available somewhere else, give a volunteer permission to scan and submit the book, and then provide the copyright holder with a copy of the book before distributing it. Since Bookshare's request is not part of a highly profitable market, I don't think the publisher would be burning up the phones to let Bookshare know they can go ahead with scanning a certain title. The publisher's staff would be focused on income-producing activities and would get around to answering Bookshare when they don't have anything else to do. Meanwhile, the person needing the book would be waiting and might even have to drop a class if it's a book needed for school. It seems like a recipe for another layer of paperwork and bureaucracy on both ends. I also wonder why publishers would see us as an important market if the copyright change is signed into law. They didn't see us as a viable market before this amendment came along, and I can't see why their attitude toward us would change.
Thanks for letting me ramble. If anyone here has some insights to share, maybe they will help me understand this better.
Monica Willyard At 12:12 AM 6/24/2007, you wrote:
Monica,I'll let Bob speak for himself. But he has been involved with the higher education community for many years and has been quite involved in California's passage of AB422, the higher education law that asks publishers to provide electronic material for higher education textbooks. While he is no longer in California, he is still involved in the higher education field. This proposed amendment is intended to start a discussion regarding many copyright related issues that concern the provision of electronic and/or other material for individuals with disabilities. There are many many issues that need to be considered before a legislation of this calibre is brought before Congress . I have not had a conversation with Bob, but a good strategist would not have begun a project of this dimension without having a plan to have someone's backing in the legislative branch. Copyright amendments are not simple to accomplish.Pratik
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank Email to bookshare-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the Subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.
