• Publishers Win a Bout in E-Book Price Fight (NYTimes) (Apple’s negotiating strategy for iPad content is giving publishers leverage in negotiations with Google over Google Editions)
• James Patterson Inc. (NYTimes Magazine) (a long account of how James Patterson mass produces phenomenally successful commodities called books)
• The Book Club With Just One Member (NYTimes, published in the same edition as the Patterson story) (an elegy for intimate one-to-one relationships between readers and texts)
• Neither Luddite nor Biltonite (George Packer’s New Yorker blog, Interesting Times) (a Postman-esque rant against information technologies that disrupt long-form reading; follow the links to Packer’s original post, and to a reaction from Nick Bilton at the NYTimes Bits blog. Packer’s position seems of a piece with Nick Carr’s argument that Google is making us stupid.)

No Tags

Here is an updated version of an inventory of law faculty blogs from around the world that I posted back in 2007.

• University of Pittsburgh School of Law
• University of Houston Law Center
• Georgetown University Law Center
• University of Chicago Law School
• University of Toronto Faculty of Law
• University of Alberta Faculty of Law
• University of Haifa Faculty of Law (in Hebrew; is there an English version?)
• University of Washington School of Law
• Marquette University Law School
• UC Davis School of Law
• University of Louisville School of Law
• Albany Law School

This is undoubtedly incomplete.  What have I missed?

Updates (thanks to commenters):

• Chicago-Kent College of Law
• Universidad de Palermo (in Spanish)

No Tags

You can buy it here, but why would you want to?

No Tags

The interesting thing about Cassandra Clare is that her name is a pseudonym derived from a name she used as a popular fan fiction author online (Cassandra Claire).  As a fan fiction author, she was both very popular and somewhat infamous for being involved in a contentious plagiarism debacle.  Some of the commentary surrounding the plagiarism episode can be found here.

What struck me reading through some of the commentary was that it seemed that the concern about plagiarism was not generated by the authors/creators whose work Claire had allegedly plagiarised, but rather from other members of the fan fiction community who were disappointed with what they perceived to be a fellow author’s lack of ethics.  Claire had borrowed lines from a number of sources – other writings, TV shows, movies etc – and maintained that she thought she had given appropriate attribution, but her attributions were not full or complete because she maintained that she couldn’t always remember exactly where she had seen or heard a particular line she had used.  Others questioned whether she could have engaged in such large scale copying without intentionally and directly copying someone else’s work, so some people didn’t believe her defense of her own actions.

As someone who spends a lot more time thinking about copyright than plagiarism, this struck me as an interesting story because it does not deal with copyright holders protecting their economic rights, but rather with members of an online community concerned to enforce shared norms relating to morals and ethics.  This is a side of the “creativity coin” that many of us don’t think about all that often.  I found it to be useful food for thought.

I also wonder if this episode has had an impact – either positive or negative – on Clare’s popularity as a mainstream fantasy fiction writer.  Her Mortal Instruments books have maintained a high position on various best-seller lists for many months.  I wonder whether her history helped or hurt her as a mainstream author.

No Tags

No Tags

Would Amazon really refuse to carry all books from one of the largest publishers in the Untied States? As my friend John Scalzi pointed out (He was one of the first to notice the move, because his publisher is part of Macmillan, and his fans asked him why his books were not available almost immediately after Amazon’s move.), Amazon waited until late Friday to remove the Macmillan books. John thought that the timing was probably designed to mitigate any negative responses that might go Amazon’s way. I think John was correct, but I think this statement reveals a perhaps bigger reason for the bluff:

“We have expressed our strong disagreement and the seriousness of our disagreement by temporarily ceasing the sale of all Macmillan titles,” Amazon said. “We want you to know that ultimately, however, we will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan’s terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books.”

Just to repeat it: “Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books.” Where else does monopoly and books arise? Ah yes, when Amazon (and others) opposes the Google Book Settlement.

I think this move provides an interesting, concrete example that will be offered to argue that the GBS will provide Google with power equal to or greater than Macmillan’s. The question is, if it is a monopoly as Amazon claims, why aren’t folks attacking all major publishers? Amazon may argue that Google will have a unique position in the e-book market, but those claims require more details if one is to sort them properly.

del.icio.us tags: Google, Amazon, Macmillion, Google Book Settlement

Sit-ins, threats, throwing food at Regents, and chants of the “What do we want? X! When do we want it? Now!” ilk remind me of a five year old throwing a tantrum; not intelligent people trying to change the system and take responsibility for their role in the problem. When I was at Berkeley, a professor noted that protesting the first Iraq war (especially in the Bay Area) was not as effective as the same thousands of people writing to Congress members and being clear where their donations and votes would go in the future. The same applies to the education funding problem.

Instead of putting all that great activist energy to campaigning for funding education, Californians have coasted on a system that cannot work without incredible growth. Californians cling to a broken property tax system, fail to push for better education funding, and back spending a billion dollars on prisons. Shame on us.

U.C. Berkeley’s alumni association sent me an email claiming close to 500,000 living alumni. That is but one campus in a system of 10 campuses. Now, add in the numbers of Californians who attend or graduated from the CalState and Community College system. Given the graduates, the current employees, and students at all the higher education campuses, there ought to be a focused, powerful political group that could move the state towards fixing its education funding problems. Rather than doing so, many of these folks waited until the state had no money and in a sense no choice about what to do to address the shortfall. The Regents and the students are finally joining together to voice their views in Sacramento. This type of action should have happened in the first place.

And, there is more to do. We need to start giving money to our respective campuses. I have more to say on this point. But in case you want to give now, here is the link to give to Cal. Here is a jump page with links to give to other U.C. campuses. Here is the link for giving to the CalState system. Here is the link to give to California’s Community College system.

When I was at Berkeley, California’s recession resulted in, I think, a 100% increase in fees over the four years. It was still a great deal. As I understand it, fees barely cover professors’ salaries at some of the campuses. Fundraising and endowment money is already part of the funding formula. But how are we doing as alumni?

Part of the problem is that there is not the culture of giving that the Ivies and other elite private schools foster. Yet, private schools cost quite a bit more, and their graduates still give huge amounts back to their schools. I must confess that until recently, I too, did not give at all. That was an error, and based, in part on the fact that giving was not part of the culture and that it had not occurred to me sooner. California education must start to foster that sense of community that generates a giving culture.

I did not and do not, however, subscribe to the idea that one should not give to a public institution. It is childish to claim that public schools do not deserve the same loyalty and support. I believe they deserve it more.

If you went to a U.C. (and really any part of the California higher education system) and have a job, I suggest that you should give at least $100 per year to your school. The education we received was highly subsidized. It’s time to let others have that same benefit.

Part of the glory and greatness of California flows from the education system. That stream of plenty is drying up because we have not funded it. If we want to continue to be a great state, positioned to compete in the information age, we must suck it up now and invest in this vital infrastructure. Or, from a purely self-interested view, giving to your campus will help maintain the value of your degree. And, yes, your degree has a value.

Here is the best part. Unlike the top private schools against which we compete, we have the numbers. Yes, it’s crowd sourcing power. 500,000 graduates at $100 per yer average would mean $50,000,000 per year to Berkeley. That money would help in huge ways. A percentage could go to stabilizing fee hikes, endowing chairs, or specific projects aimed at helping students (and as much as I love the Bears, no, sports funding is not the best way to address the current problems). If such giving occurred at all the campuses across California’s higher education system, the effect could be huge. In addition, the higher percentage of alumni who give, the easier it is for development offices to obtain large donations from big donors and foundations.

California, it is time to wake up. The future is still ours for the taking, but we must pay attention to the things that propelled us to greatness. Education is a huge part of that success. Let’s fund it for our continued success today and in the future.

No Tags

Technology | Academics| Policy (TAP).  http://www.techpolicy.com/

Interesting collection of sponsors.  Check it out.

No Tags

No Tags

Interestingly, the reason I am aware of Webster’s online presence (I tend to use Oxford’s dictionaries, myself, but they are all paywalled) is that the online version is regularly cited by federal and state courts when discussing definitions (I may do a study of this to see when the shift from printed dictionaries to online dictionaries took place and how extensive it is). If it’s good enough for the courts, shouldn’t it be good enough for the kids?

Via Boing Boing, jwz, and the UK’s Guardian newspaper.

No Tags