The major positive role, for the author, of the Publishing House are the marketing and distribution channels. The major Positive role for the consumer is a readable book with some reasonable assumptions of quality.
When the distribution channels become available to the author directly [or 'more directly']. The remaining value of the publishing house becomes... fungible.
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
Maybe, but as I understand it, authors can self-publish to the Kindle store, so iBookstore doesn't add anything new there, unless Apple takes extra steps to promote this to authors that Amazon does not.
And somehow you think it's APPLE who doesn't want to sell stuff to the entire world all at once because they WANT to show how fantastic the US is and doesn't NEED money from anywhere BUT the US?
Where in the flames of hell did you come to that conclusion? I never thought nor said such things.
Give it a few months. They'll come 'round... sort of like NBC decided to when they pulled their TV shows off iTunes temporarily.
I'm not defending Apple's policy but these guys are greedy bastards. As it stand eBooks are a rip off, I thought they'd be laughing behind our backs. Perhaps they still are, while pretending to give out to get even more of a share,
There is a role that the big publishing houses serve that needs to be discussed. I am torn about this role myself, and so I will not offer 'solutions' just commentary.
Publishers act as arbiters of taste by filtering out of millions of submission, those that are 'worthy' of becoming 'literature'. They are the gate keepers. There are several 'self publishing houses, I have worked for one as a technician (iUniverse - are they still around?). The drek that comes through the 'self publish' model is astounding. So, I am torn with 'big publishing's' role as a quality filter.
(cut for brevity)
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
All points well taken...
And something that I don't really give credit to when I think of music publishers.. Somehow I think of Aerosmith or Sting going into a studio, recoding their newest works and leaving and the masters go to duplication.... I know it doesn't __really__ happen that way, sometimes (many times) tracks are composed of several different takes, and audio / sound levels get tweaked etc etc... Now sometimes a band may be involved to some degree and in rare cases a great degree in this process and I'm sure all the bands have to give their final 'okay' before the complete album goes off to press but yes... we do tend to overlook the actual work done behind the scenes of an album or book.
I'm sure that what the band or author turns in to the publisher and what the publisher actually releases are noticeably different animals.
Now on to the mega-million-dollar question...
Given the level of 'roughness' todays world readily accepts due to the unedited 'wild west' nature of the web... are those 'publisher changes' appreciated, expected or desired by people growing up today?
Where in the flames of hell did you come to that conclusion? I never thought nor said such things.
GEE I DON'T KNOW...
Do ya think it was the DEVIL RED BOX you put around the disclaimer, "*iBooks available only in the US".
What on earth would YOU take from it had you been presented a graphic with a bright RED box around the words "*iBooks available only in the US" without ANY indication (like including another posters quote) that you might have been answering a question posed by someone else as to who could shop at the iBook store...
The image without any commentary leaves the reader to discern the posters POINT by the graphic alone... A bright red highlight box was a good 1st step in letting readers decipher your meaning now the BOX to me said what was found inside was important and the RED indicated a negative or urgent feeling (to me anyway) since red is often used for urgent warnings and or hazards worldwide.
End result to me was the person who posted that graphic did so to show that the iBook Store being for US only was a NEGATIVE or something he/she was upset about.
Did you actually need me to explain that? And what troubles me more is how you were in such utter shock and disbelief that I might have come to the conclusion.
Clearly a picture ALONE is NOT worth a thousand words... if you were simply answering a previous poster who asked if the books were for sale worldwide it might have been better if you quoted the text so it was clear you were answering an QUESTION instead of making some random statement.
Do ya think it was the DEVIL RED BOX you put around the disclaimer, "*iBooks available only in the US".
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question.
I shouldn't need to explain this as it was self evident. Quit wasting my time.
Given the level of 'roughness' todays world readily accepts due to the unedited 'wild west' nature of the web... are those 'publisher changes' appreciated, expected or desired by people growing up today?
And that is the question, isn't it? Will blogging kill the newspapers? Will self publish fiction destroy the novel?[is the novel itself simply nothing more than an artifact of the dead tree publishing medium? as the 'album' is nothing more than an artifact of recording industry?] Will YouTube kill Network TV [we can only hope ;-)].
I myself am currently very fond of 'Lit2Go' audio books, listed under Itunes U. These are free audio books of 'classic' literature that has gone into the public domain. I am also a fan of the Gutenburg project.
Do the existence of these free products undermine/destroy the market for new content?
When everything is free, what is the value[to the creator] of creating something new?
These are the questions that 'society' will answer over time. The internet has been disruptive to a huge number of industries already (not to mention governments).
To copyright something like that all you have to do is send it via registered post in a sealed padded envelope to yourself, which will be signed and dated - and when you receive it you simply don't open it. Thereby making an earlier date for the same content that other people can get a hold of - thus proof it's your work. People use this method for making music too. You only have to pay a small postage fee and you have copyrighted signed and dated content. You're welcome!
Yes, everyone be sure to thank Ireland for propagating an urban legend.
To copyright something like that all you have to do is send it via registered post in a sealed padded envelope to yourself, which will be signed and dated - and when you receive it you simply don't open it. Thereby making an earlier date for the same content that other people can get a hold of - thus proof it's your work. People use this method for making music too. You only have to pay a small postage fee and you have copyrighted signed and dated content. You're welcome!
Sending a document to yourself, gives you a time stamp. But it is not like, sending something in to the Library of Congress is expensive, trademarks are expensive copyrights are not. Cheapest would just to have a Notary Public notify a statement attached to a copy of the book. $5 in VA
Could it possibly be that Ireland was pointing out the fact that he doesn't much care/is annoyed that this doesn't involve him yet.
Wow... okay without any COMMENTARY from the author this could very well be the reason for his random posting... however I don't quite get it...
- Apple is a US based company
- AI is primarily focused at reporting Apple news to US based readers.. This should go without saying which is why I feel the need to say it or run the HIGH risk of someone posting a snide comment trying to correct me... That AI is of course read by people worldwide and maybe even BEYOND! (just covering myself) but it is not exactly representing itself as anything other than a US based/focused Apple centric news site.
If Ireland is some how 'miffed' because the Apple centric news piece doesn't concern him then I'm sorry but thats too bad... If I were a GA person should I get all pissy each and every time AI does a Apple news item that isn't specifically geared to graphic artists?
Or should we all pressure AI make it a MISSION STATEMENT that it will no longer publish ANY Apple items/stories/etc UNLESS they are universally available worldwide.
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question.
Thankfully there are easy enough ways to access the U.S. iTunes Store from anywhere else in the world. I myself have taught many people I know how to do it.
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question. I shouldn't need to explain this as it was self evident. Quit wasting my time.
Quit wasting YOUR time...
Why on earth are you even in this discussion topic? You said it yourself, if you live outside the US then iBooks (and as a result) iBook discussions are out of the question. The point is it's the truth!
So to get this all straightened out...
- You realize that Apple is little to no say about selling into International Markets.
- You realize that Apple is none the less interested in making this happen
And you still seemed PO'd that this story exists... should AI simply not post news on Apple events that aren't available worldwide?
There is a role that the big publishing houses serve that needs to be discussed.
I am torn about this role myself, and so I will not offer 'solutions' just commentary.
Publishers act as arbiters of taste by filtering out of millions of submission, those that are 'worthy' of becoming 'literature'. They are the gate keepers. There are several 'self publishing houses, I have worked for one as a technician (iUniverse - are they still around?). The drek that comes through the 'self publish' model is astounding. So, I am torn with 'big publishing's' role as a quality filter.
Big Publishing also imposes standards other than 'quality'. They normalize most books into 'standard' English through copy editing.[note, I am an English speaker, so I used English as the example language].
But the role of copy editor is not limited just to publishing houses. Small companies and individuals make a livelihood out of it independent of them.
The major positive role, for the author, of the Publishing House are the marketing and distribution channels. The major Positive role for the consumer is a readable book with some reasonable assumptions of quality.
When the distribution channels become available to the author directly [or 'more directly']. The remaining value of the publishing house becomes... fungible.
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
There is room for the publisher in future models, but obviously not for the printing presses and logistics.
No kidding - I think if I were Random House I would worry if I was the only one getting 30%!
[Fixed already - WOW!]
I bet 30% is better than their current retail cut. Manufacturing & shipping of physical books just on weight alone has got to cost a pretty penny.
There's no good business reason to stay out of Apple's iTunes or iBooks marketplaces - it's dumb for music, movie, tv and now book companies. If they've already layed out the book for print in a pre-press app, they've already done 90-95% of the work, and it's non-exclusive. The only practical reason to not get into Apple's pond is if Random House had plans to create their own online bookstore or device - that logic is an epic fail for music and movie companies.
If they're holding out over possible price wars, its because the book people are stupidly locked into their physical retail price points and want those higher prices, but combined with the cheaper manufacturing. If that is the reason, it's an incredibly stupid one. When it comes down to it, I guess they just don't want to sell more books.
Comments
The major positive role, for the author, of the Publishing House are the marketing and distribution channels. The major Positive role for the consumer is a readable book with some reasonable assumptions of quality.
When the distribution channels become available to the author directly [or 'more directly']. The remaining value of the publishing house becomes... fungible.
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
Maybe, but as I understand it, authors can self-publish to the Kindle store, so iBookstore doesn't add anything new there, unless Apple takes extra steps to promote this to authors that Amazon does not.
And somehow you think it's APPLE who doesn't want to sell stuff to the entire world all at once because they WANT to show how fantastic the US is and doesn't NEED money from anywhere BUT the US?
Where in the flames of hell did you come to that conclusion? I never thought nor said such things.
Give it a few months. They'll come 'round... sort of like NBC decided to when they pulled their TV shows off iTunes temporarily.
I'm not defending Apple's policy but these guys are greedy bastards. As it stand eBooks are a rip off, I thought they'd be laughing behind our backs. Perhaps they still are, while pretending to give out to get even more of a share,
You all assume everyone will own an iPad and this will be the only source to read from.
There is a role that the big publishing houses serve that needs to be discussed. I am torn about this role myself, and so I will not offer 'solutions' just commentary.
Publishers act as arbiters of taste by filtering out of millions of submission, those that are 'worthy' of becoming 'literature'. They are the gate keepers. There are several 'self publishing houses, I have worked for one as a technician (iUniverse - are they still around?). The drek that comes through the 'self publish' model is astounding. So, I am torn with 'big publishing's' role as a quality filter.
(cut for brevity)
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
All points well taken...
And something that I don't really give credit to when I think of music publishers.. Somehow I think of Aerosmith or Sting going into a studio, recoding their newest works and leaving and the masters go to duplication.... I know it doesn't __really__ happen that way, sometimes (many times) tracks are composed of several different takes, and audio / sound levels get tweaked etc etc... Now sometimes a band may be involved to some degree and in rare cases a great degree in this process and I'm sure all the bands have to give their final 'okay' before the complete album goes off to press but yes... we do tend to overlook the actual work done behind the scenes of an album or book.
I'm sure that what the band or author turns in to the publisher and what the publisher actually releases are noticeably different animals.
Now on to the mega-million-dollar question...
Given the level of 'roughness' todays world readily accepts due to the unedited 'wild west' nature of the web... are those 'publisher changes' appreciated, expected or desired by people growing up today?
Where in the flames of hell did you come to that conclusion? I never thought nor said such things.
GEE I DON'T KNOW...
Do ya think it was the DEVIL RED BOX you put around the disclaimer, "*iBooks available only in the US".
What on earth would YOU take from it had you been presented a graphic with a bright RED box around the words "*iBooks available only in the US" without ANY indication (like including another posters quote) that you might have been answering a question posed by someone else as to who could shop at the iBook store...
The image without any commentary leaves the reader to discern the posters POINT by the graphic alone... A bright red highlight box was a good 1st step in letting readers decipher your meaning now the BOX to me said what was found inside was important and the RED indicated a negative or urgent feeling (to me anyway) since red is often used for urgent warnings and or hazards worldwide.
End result to me was the person who posted that graphic did so to show that the iBook Store being for US only was a NEGATIVE or something he/she was upset about.
Did you actually need me to explain that? And what troubles me more is how you were in such utter shock and disbelief that I might have come to the conclusion.
Clearly a picture ALONE is NOT worth a thousand words... if you were simply answering a previous poster who asked if the books were for sale worldwide it might have been better if you quoted the text so it was clear you were answering an QUESTION instead of making some random statement.
GEE I DON'T KNOW...
Do ya think it was the DEVIL RED BOX you put around the disclaimer, "*iBooks available only in the US".
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question.
I shouldn't need to explain this as it was self evident. Quit wasting my time.
Now on to the mega-million-dollar question...
Given the level of 'roughness' todays world readily accepts due to the unedited 'wild west' nature of the web... are those 'publisher changes' appreciated, expected or desired by people growing up today?
And that is the question, isn't it? Will blogging kill the newspapers? Will self publish fiction destroy the novel?[is the novel itself simply nothing more than an artifact of the dead tree publishing medium? as the 'album' is nothing more than an artifact of recording industry?] Will YouTube kill Network TV [we can only hope ;-)].
I myself am currently very fond of 'Lit2Go' audio books, listed under Itunes U. These are free audio books of 'classic' literature that has gone into the public domain. I am also a fan of the Gutenburg project.
Do the existence of these free products undermine/destroy the market for new content?
When everything is free, what is the value[to the creator] of creating something new?
These are the questions that 'society' will answer over time. The internet has been disruptive to a huge number of industries already (not to mention governments).
and yes, I do not do 'brevity' well :-)
I shouldn't need to explain this as it was self evident. Quit wasting my time.
And all this time I thought I was the only one.
To copyright something like that all you have to do is send it via registered post in a sealed padded envelope to yourself, which will be signed and dated - and when you receive it you simply don't open it. Thereby making an earlier date for the same content that other people can get a hold of - thus proof it's your work. People use this method for making music too. You only have to pay a small postage fee and you have copyrighted signed and dated content. You're welcome!
Yes, everyone be sure to thank Ireland for propagating an urban legend.
Just one of many sources that disprove the above:
http://womeninbusiness.about.com/od/...w-selfmail.htm
To copyright something like that all you have to do is send it via registered post in a sealed padded envelope to yourself, which will be signed and dated - and when you receive it you simply don't open it. Thereby making an earlier date for the same content that other people can get a hold of - thus proof it's your work. People use this method for making music too. You only have to pay a small postage fee and you have copyrighted signed and dated content. You're welcome!
Sending a document to yourself, gives you a time stamp. But it is not like, sending something in to the Library of Congress is expensive, trademarks are expensive copyrights are not. Cheapest would just to have a Notary Public notify a statement attached to a copy of the book. $5 in VA
OR
Could it possibly be that Ireland was pointing out the fact that he doesn't much care/is annoyed that this doesn't involve him yet.
Wow... okay without any COMMENTARY from the author this could very well be the reason for his random posting... however I don't quite get it...
- Apple is a US based company
- AI is primarily focused at reporting Apple news to US based readers.. This should go without saying which is why I feel the need to say it or run the HIGH risk of someone posting a snide comment trying to correct me... That AI is of course read by people worldwide and maybe even BEYOND!
If Ireland is some how 'miffed' because the Apple centric news piece doesn't concern him then I'm sorry but thats too bad... If I were a GA person should I get all pissy each and every time AI does a Apple news item that isn't specifically geared to graphic artists?
Or should we all pressure AI make it a MISSION STATEMENT that it will no longer publish ANY Apple items/stories/etc UNLESS they are universally available worldwide.
Yea good luck with that...
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question.
Thankfully there are easy enough ways to access the U.S. iTunes Store from anywhere else in the world. I myself have taught many people I know how to do it.
I know it's not Apple fault. But the point is if you live outside the U.S. it doesn't matter who's to blame. The point is it's the truth. If you like outside the U.S. then for the time being iBooks is out of the question. I shouldn't need to explain this as it was self evident. Quit wasting my time.
Quit wasting YOUR time...
Why on earth are you even in this discussion topic? You said it yourself, if you live outside the US then iBooks (and as a result) iBook discussions are out of the question. The point is it's the truth!
So to get this all straightened out...
- You realize that Apple is little to no say about selling into International Markets.
- You realize that Apple is none the less interested in making this happen
And you still seemed PO'd that this story exists... should AI simply not post news on Apple events that aren't available worldwide?
Edit: 'Daft' and 'Another harebrained idea' were two of my late fathers' favorite descriptions when describing me!
And with good reason!
Very funny! I never met an existentialist who was funny too!
Are you familiar with Steven Wright?
There is a role that the big publishing houses serve that needs to be discussed.
I am torn about this role myself, and so I will not offer 'solutions' just commentary.
Publishers act as arbiters of taste by filtering out of millions of submission, those that are 'worthy' of becoming 'literature'. They are the gate keepers. There are several 'self publishing houses, I have worked for one as a technician (iUniverse - are they still around?). The drek that comes through the 'self publish' model is astounding. So, I am torn with 'big publishing's' role as a quality filter.
Big Publishing also imposes standards other than 'quality'. They normalize most books into 'standard' English through copy editing.[note, I am an English speaker, so I used English as the example language].
But the role of copy editor is not limited just to publishing houses. Small companies and individuals make a livelihood out of it independent of them.
The major positive role, for the author, of the Publishing House are the marketing and distribution channels. The major Positive role for the consumer is a readable book with some reasonable assumptions of quality.
When the distribution channels become available to the author directly [or 'more directly']. The remaining value of the publishing house becomes... fungible.
This, I believe is a major reason that Random House is dragging its feet.
There is room for the publisher in future models, but obviously not for the printing presses and logistics.
There is room for the publisher in future models, but obviously not for the printing presses and logistics.
There is probably room for a publisher - but will the role of 'publisher' be profitable?
So now Apple runs the publishing world- I'd thought I'd heard it all until these comments on here today.
You all assume everyone will own an iPad and this will be the only source to read from.
Of course not
sorreee, I know I should not rise to the bait!
No kidding - I think if I were Random House I would worry if I was the only one getting 30%!
[Fixed already - WOW!]
I bet 30% is better than their current retail cut. Manufacturing & shipping of physical books just on weight alone has got to cost a pretty penny.
There's no good business reason to stay out of Apple's iTunes or iBooks marketplaces - it's dumb for music, movie, tv and now book companies. If they've already layed out the book for print in a pre-press app, they've already done 90-95% of the work, and it's non-exclusive. The only practical reason to not get into Apple's pond is if Random House had plans to create their own online bookstore or device - that logic is an epic fail for music and movie companies.
If they're holding out over possible price wars, its because the book people are stupidly locked into their physical retail price points and want those higher prices, but combined with the cheaper manufacturing. If that is the reason, it's an incredibly stupid one. When it comes down to it, I guess they just don't want to sell more books.