4 ms·

If only the publishers would let them do this with books!

by k2enemy 14y ago

mikecane 14y ago
If Hollywood falls next with video, book publishers won't be far behind.
- derpenxyne 14y ago
  That's a big if.
- koenigdavidmj 14y ago
  There's Ultraviolet now for video.
SG- 14y ago
I'm sure they will in 5-10 years. The ebook/ereader market is rather 'new' compared to the digital audio market, at this point everyone has likely already purchased a digital version of their music or pirated it so there won't be any lost sales (same idea for iTunes match and other matching/cloud services). It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind.
- ben1040 14y ago
  >It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind. The reason seems to be exactly what you pointed out - the music industry's got a 10 year head start on this because technology arrived sooner that grew the market and pretty much forced the labels' hands. Broadband, Napster, iPods, and the industry's ridiculous DRM responses to piracy (and the pain & suffering that came with it) led the labels to realize a common sense approach was the only thing that would save them. The movie studios certainly still haven't learned this yet - I feel like we're at the point with movies that we were with music in the mid-2000s. Those were the dark days when there were a dozen different competing DRM standards for downloads, and the record labels were releasing CDs that were deliberately damaged so as to not be rippable (or worse, that covertly introduced rootkits that interfered with access to the CDROM drive).
- k2enemy 14y ago
  > It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind. There is also a big difference in how easy/legal it is for a home user to convert the physical good to a digital good. Ripping CDs is trivial and legal. Ripping DVDs is illegal due to the DMCA, and ripping books is physically challenging. The larger the barrier to ripping, the more publishers can charge people to own both formats.
WillyF 14y ago
I've always thought that there should be a startup that both sells used books and "rips" books for you. You buy the used version for a couple of bucks, pay a couple of bucks for them to "scan" it, and you get a PDF and they destroy the book. I would think that destroying a hard copy for every PDF distributed would offer some sort of legal protection, but I doubt that would stop the publishers from suing the company into bankruptcy.
- mellamoyo 14y ago
  I've used this to great success, it does just what you're talking about, including OCR if you'd like: http://1dollarscan.com http://1dollarscan.com
  - vincentkriek 14y ago
    The digital output, is that a decent book or just a plain scan with (a lot of) faults?
portman 14y ago
I currently buy two copies of books that I really really like -- both the Kindle and the hardback, both from Amazon. Maybe there are enough crazy people like me that the publishers shouldn't offer this 2:1 deal?
- teh_klev 14y ago
  Have to confess I do the same for my favourite authors' hardbacks. I'd happily do this more often and with paperbacks if they priced it right - I like having and seeing books on shelves. However at the moment I mostly feel resentful and gouged by the publisher when I want a book in both formats and they get a double dip from me for exactly the same set of words.

If only the publishers would let them do this with books!

by k2enemy 14y ago

If only the publishers would let them do this with books!

mikecane 14y ago

If Hollywood falls next with video, book publishers won't be far behind.

derpenxyne 14y ago
That's a big if.
koenigdavidmj 14y ago
There's Ultraviolet now for video.

SG- 14y ago

I'm sure they will in 5-10 years. The ebook/ereader market is rather 'new' compared to the digital audio market, at this point everyone has likely already purchased a digital version of their music or pirated it so there won't be any lost sales (same idea for iTunes match and other matching/cloud services). It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind.

ben1040 14y ago
>It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind. The reason seems to be exactly what you pointed out - the music industry's got a 10 year head start on this because technology arrived sooner that grew the market and pretty much forced the labels' hands. Broadband, Napster, iPods, and the industry's ridiculous DRM responses to piracy (and the pain & suffering that came with it) led the labels to realize a common sense approach was the only thing that would save them. The movie studios certainly still haven't learned this yet - I feel like we're at the point with movies that we were with music in the mid-2000s. Those were the dark days when there were a dozen different competing DRM standards for downloads, and the record labels were releasing CDs that were deliberately damaged so as to not be rippable (or worse, that covertly introduced rootkits that interfered with access to the CDROM drive).
k2enemy 14y ago
> It's interesting to see the music industry keep moving forward and allowing this type of stuff to happen (and the itunes match/etc services). The other two big industries are so far behind. There is also a big difference in how easy/legal it is for a home user to convert the physical good to a digital good. Ripping CDs is trivial and legal. Ripping DVDs is illegal due to the DMCA, and ripping books is physically challenging. The larger the barrier to ripping, the more publishers can charge people to own both formats.

WillyF 14y ago

I've always thought that there should be a startup that both sells used books and "rips" books for you. You buy the used version for a couple of bucks, pay a couple of bucks for them to "scan" it, and you get a PDF and they destroy the book. I would think that destroying a hard copy for every PDF distributed would offer some sort of legal protection, but I doubt that would stop the publishers from suing the company into bankruptcy.

mellamoyo 14y ago
I've used this to great success, it does just what you're talking about, including OCR if you'd like: http://1dollarscan.com http://1dollarscan.com
- vincentkriek 14y ago
  The digital output, is that a decent book or just a plain scan with (a lot of) faults?

portman 14y ago

I currently buy two copies of books that I really really like -- both the Kindle and the hardback, both from Amazon. Maybe there are enough crazy people like me that the publishers shouldn't offer this 2:1 deal?

teh_klev 14y ago
Have to confess I do the same for my favourite authors' hardbacks. I'd happily do this more often and with paperbacks if they priced it right - I like having and seeing books on shelves. However at the moment I mostly feel resentful and gouged by the publisher when I want a book in both formats and they get a double dip from me for exactly the same set of words.