Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Google's Library Up and Running

Posted by Hemos on Mon Mar 21, 2005 09:34 AM
from the good-news-for-the-information dept.
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that Google Print results are beginning to appear on searches. For those who don't know, Google has been scanning from libraries from some of the world's greatest universities in order to compile a freely accessible online library. An easy way to turn up these results is to simply type "book", and then whatever you want to search for. For instance, book origin of species will turn up the full text of Charles Darwin's controversial treatise. 20,000 leagues, Oliver Twist and Pride and Prejudice and m o r e are all there in full. It'll be interestin to see how publishers deal with this if demand for these books declines. In the meantime, would anyone like to point out any good books?" Hopefully, Google can also start to index some books that are being released in the Creative Commons/alternative open licenses.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Google's Library Up and Running | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 420 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Out of print (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BWJones (18351) * on Monday March 21 2005, @09:35AM (#11998487)
    (http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/ | Last Journal: Friday November 09, @08:01PM)
    It'll be interestin to see how publishers deal with this if demand for these books declines. In the meantime, would anyone like to point out any good books?"

    Here is a hint that will help and not hurt the publishers. Put online out of print books. I would like to make the same argument for out of print music and movies and scientific journals as well which ironically, could hold huge profits for studios and publishing houses. After all, this is the ideal for long tail businesses, right? if these businesses could release for nominal fees all of the movies, music and books that have already paid for themselves, Google (or iTunes or iMovie or iPub or whatever) could serve as the front end which would allow for the finding of said information and then the publishing houses could make money on products that long ago had paid for themselves and created profits. This is almost like free (as in beer) money for them and low cost media for us.

    • Re:Out of print (Score:5, Interesting)

      by pbranes (565105) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:39AM (#11998528)
      Out of print books online is a great idea, but what I can't understand is why google doesn't have a page that just lists the books they have in full-text. They compare it to a bookstore, but in a bookstore you can see books you have never heard of. You can't do that with google's library because you can only search for books that you know.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Out of print by BoomerSooner (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:47AM
    • Re:Out of print (Score:5, Informative)

      by Total_Wimp (564548) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:13AM (#11998925)
      Out of print, copyrighted, whatever. This is how google has chosen to deal with the subject:

      Thank you for using Google Print.

      You have either reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing limit for this book.

      Google protects works that are under copyright by restricting access to certain pages and restricting the number of pages you can view. You may continue to take advantage of Google Print by clicking on About this Book. Thank you for using Google Print.


      I had thought that they were putting "books" online. Turns out they're just putting the ability to search through books online.

      BTW, this came up when I hit next page too many times on "Origin of Species" who's original text, I presume, is not copyrighted.

      TW
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Out of print (Score:4, Informative)

        by Wiwi Jumbo (105640) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:26AM (#11999101)
        (http://www.mondochrome.ca/ | Last Journal: Sunday March 03 2002, @10:30PM)
        I might be wrong about this, but I think that the copyright might be in relation to the text (appearing to) having been scanned from a book printed in 1996.

        For Google to offer it for free would mean that they'd have to scan it from a printed source which is also out of copyright??

        Well, I think that's the case....

        Anyone who says they fully understand copyright is either a fool or a liar... or worse. ;-)
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Out of print (Score:5, Informative)

          by ComputerSlicer23 (516509) on Monday March 21 2005, @11:14AM (#11999717)
          Project Gutenburg is a pretty good source for copyright info. Here's what he has to say:

          FAQ entry on books with updated copyright dates [gutenberg.org]

          So there you go.

          It's my understanding that they can't re-copyright the actual text. However, they can copyright the presentation, line editting, page breaks and whatnot. So you could take the actual text from them, you couldn't take the text in that presentation from them.

          Fun huh?.

          Kirby

          [ Parent ]
          • Public Domain can't be copyrighted (Score:4, Informative)

            by dananderson (1880) on Monday March 21 2005, @12:30PM (#12000960)
            (http://dan.drydog.com/)
            I work a lot with putting copyright materials online. See /http://yosemite.ca.us/history/ [yosemite.ca.us] I get a lot of resistience from librarians, but that's another story. Only original material can be copyrighted. For a reprinted book, for example, that would be new introductions or new art. It would not minor editing or line breaks. A federal court found that high-quality photographs of art do not have copyright protection. They were considered "slavish copies," without any additional creativity. Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., 36 F. Supp. 2d 191, 1999 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).

            That said, it's always better to reproduce from an early printing, and not a new printing, to avoid any question of copyright.

            [ Parent ]
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Out of print by cadence007 (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:41PM
      • Re:Out of print by micromoog (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @10:46AM
      • Re:Out of print by UltraAyla (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:52AM
      • Re:Out of print by bcrowell (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @11:59AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Out of print by Monty_Lovering (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:15AM
    • Re:Out of print by will_die (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:55AM
    • Re:Out of print by pruss (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:37AM
    • Re:Out of print by incognitopoet (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @01:29PM
    • Re:Out of print by dabigpaybackski (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @05:14PM
    • Re:Out of print by drsmithy (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @11:07PM
    • Re:Out of print by Chalst (Score:2) Tuesday March 22 2005, @07:20AM
    • Re:Out of print by gevantry (Score:1) Tuesday March 22 2005, @08:27AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Now the question is... by FlyByPC (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:36AM
    • ...well. Will many people read them, on-line? Even working in the IT industry; even with good LCD monitors, laptops, eBooks and whatever I've still noticed a strong tendency (and one that I'm very guilty of) to destroy great swathes of forest to generate the paper to print out the on-line doc so I can digest it better.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Now the question is... by diegocgteleline.es (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:42AM
    • Re:Now the question is... by xSauronx (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:48AM
    • I'll never read online (Score:4, Interesting)

      by WankersRevenge (452399) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:49AM (#11998656)
      (http://www.jezner.com/)
      Reading books in an experience for me. For me, reading is more than just scanning my eyes over text. I love the feel of a book. Especially the smell of an old one. I love to underline favorite passages and write down any thoughts that come to mind about them. I love bending the pages back so I can read while walking. And when I'm finished, I usually give my book to interested friends. My only requirement is that they write in them as well. You can't get that online.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Now the question is... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Bohnanza (523456) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:51AM (#11998677)
      With all of these great works online, will the masses bother to read them?

      Do they read those from Project Gutenberg? [gutenberg.org] I'm not sure how many do.

      While I get excited about the prospect of "free" literature, I find that I don't take advantage of it. The main reason is that I don't feel like reading a novel while sitting in front of the computer. This is especially difficult to do while sitting on the toilet, or on a plane or train, or on a toilet on a plane or a train. Sure, I could bring a laptop, but it's a lot more cumbersome than a paperback.

      I've considered printing them out, but this would be much more expensive than just purchasing a paperback (or, in a lot of cases, hardback) edition, even using my antique laserjet. This might make some sense for rare OOP books, that's about it.

      What we need is a really cheap, really good e-book reader that accepts multiple and non-proprietary formats.

      [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • textbooks (Score:5, Interesting)

    It would be great if textbooks were on there. $120 is too much for a calculus book.
    • Mod parent up - not troll by thepotoo (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:46AM
      • Hardly by j_heisenberg (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:59AM
    • Re:textbooks by Scott7477 (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:48AM
      • Re:textbooks by tomstdenis (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:07AM
        • Re:textbooks by CokeBear (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @11:11AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Help out wikibooks! by xtal (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:56AM
    • Re:textbooks (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Silver Sloth (770927) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:01AM (#11998785)

      I'm sure this is going to be an unpopular viewpoint and may get modded flamebait but I've seen the other side of achedemic publishing.

      The problem with pricing on text books is the very limited market. Even if Proffessor Plum sells a copy to every student on his course he will only sell ~100 per year. Compare and contrast with the thousends of copies sold of the average novel. Moreover the calculus book requires specialist typesetting, less of a problem nowadays but the average printing house isn't set up for printing sigmas. All these force the price up.

      Just because students are poor(ish) doesn't mean that they can be excempt from market forces.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:textbooks by Roger_Wilco (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @10:07AM
        • Re:textbooks by Silver Sloth (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:19AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:textbooks by halber_mensch (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @10:26AM
      • Re:textbooks by kin_korn_karn (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:26AM
      • Re:textbooks (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Qzukk (229616) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:28AM (#11999136)
        Here's a less popular viewpoint, at least amongst professors.

        Quit using your class to sell your textbook.

        Look, I don't care how many PhD's you have in Math, your personal Calculus textbook is no different than any other. In fact, you didn't even make any stunning breakthroughs in the field of undergraduate integration and derivation, so quit writing a new version every year!

        Students wouldn't have to pay $120 a textbook if the professors didn't want it to be that way.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:textbooks by OO7david (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @11:52AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:textbooks by bcrowell (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @12:14PM
          • Re:textbooks by ad0gg (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @02:19PM
            • Re:textbooks (Score:4, Interesting)

              by bcrowell (177657) on Monday March 21 2005, @03:10PM (#12003186)
              (http://www.lightandmatter.com/)
              At $130 retail price, the professor is probably taking half or $50.
              A typical royalty is about 10 [textbookpublisher.com] to 12 [weber.edu] percent of "net" (i.e., wholesale), which works out to be about 7.5-9% of retail, not 38%, as you seem to be assuming.

              and thats more than 4 colors.
              "Four colors" refers to the number of colors of ink, not the number of colors that can be produced by mixing them, which is theoretically infinite.

              $20 to $30 to print a book? You gotta to be kidding. 0.10 a cents page?
              The textbooks that are $130 typically have a page count of about 1000-1100 pages, rather than the 200-300 pages you seem to be assuming. The ppb (paper, printing, and binding) cost for black and white upper division physics textbooks is typically about 3 dollars [weber.edu]. Four-color printing costs four times more than one color, and the $130 color undergrad textbooks are typically about twice the page count of a graduate text, so 3x4x2 gives about $24. The price is really a setup cost; once you've got the press running, the cost to make one more copy is very small. This is all going to depend a lot on the length of the press run.

              [ Parent ]
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • All my professors were like this: by zippthorne (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @01:15PM
        • Re:textbooks by momoe (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @02:19PM
        • A counter perspective by lakeland (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @05:03PM
        • Re:textbooks by danila (Score:2) Tuesday March 22 2005, @05:33AM
      • Re:textbooks by Slack3r78 (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @10:51AM
        • Re:textbooks by TGK (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @11:08AM
          • Re:textbooks by bigbigbison (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @12:49PM
            • Re:textbooks by TGK (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @03:36PM
          • Re:textbooks by xenocide2 (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @02:36PM
        • Re:textbooks by Rutulian (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:49PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:textbooks by Ibanez (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @11:27AM
      • Re:textbooks by stzein (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @02:07PM
      • Look at Linus Pauling textbooks sometime by doom (Score:2) Tuesday March 22 2005, @08:13AM
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:textbooks by halber_mensch (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:07AM
    • Re:textbooks by fermion (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:15AM
      • Re:textbooks by grimarr (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:38AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:textbooks by anonicon (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:54AM
    • Re:textbooks by Otterley (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @11:28AM
    • Re:textbooks by Girm (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:47AM
    • Re:textbooks by bcrowell (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @12:17PM
    • Re:textbooks by grixnair (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:06AM
      • Re:textbooks by grixnair (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:24AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:textbooks by shaka999 (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:09AM
    • Re:textbooks by thogard (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @07:42PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • one cliche, one other (Score:5, Interesting)

    by yagu (721525) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <ugayay>> on Monday March 21 2005, @09:37AM (#11998514)
    (Last Journal: Friday November 16, @09:48AM)

    I know this is cliche, but Grapes of Wrath is a classic, and one of my alltime favorites. I've read it four or five times, and it gets better each read. Yeah, it's always in the "list", but it deserves to be.

    Another favorite of mine is more related to what /.-ers are about. Read Player Piano by Vonnegut. It's not his most well know work, but it is, I think, maybe one of his best, certainly one of his most perceptive. Just my $.02.

    • Re:one cliche, one other by yagu (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:00AM
      • Re:one cliche, one other (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Neop2Lemus (683727) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:24AM (#11999082)
        (Last Journal: Monday December 26 2005, @12:11AM)
        You got modded down because you recommended books that the mods hadn't read, and it hurt their feelings.

        Let me join you.

        I recommend Homer. The Iliad or The Odyessy are two of the greatest books ever written, start with the Odyssey.

        Following in the grand-parent posts' steps, I can recommend Timequake by Vonnegut as an underrated book. But back to the public domain.

        Aristiophanes is the only comedian as funny as Monty Python, check him out though you'll have to read up on your mythology and other Greek lit. But there is nothing like Aristophanes, he is outrageous. Lysystrata [The Breaker of Armies] is placed in the [historical] war between Athens and Sparta, and the women of Greece declare a sex strike till peace is made.

        I've also enjoyed the Tragedians (Euripides, Sophocles, and Aeschylus), you'd think they are boring but it's pithy and exciting exciting, nothing near as depressing as Million Dollar Baby.

        In fact, check out any of the Greco-Roman stuff, you'll be blown away.

        [ Parent ]
    • Re:one cliche, one other by Momoru (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:45AM
  • Books with no cover by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:38AM
  • So once you've got "Origin of Species" up on the screen, how do you prevent it from highlighting every occurrence of the words "Origin", "of" and "species" in yellow? It's very annoying.
  • A lot of these books have been available online (and easily findable via search engines) for years, courtesy of Project Gutenberg [gutenberg.org] and others. Granted, Google gives them a little higher profile, and maybe they'll be more accessible, but it's not like the publishers of Shakespeare and Stevenson are facing something really new here.
  • Copyrighted material? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sisukapalli1 (471175) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:40AM (#11998544)
    I clicked on Pride and Prejudice -- the page is an image (dynamically generated with search phrases highlighted). My gripes: (1) context menus are disabled (so, may be difficult to save the image from the page), and (2) there is a big "copyrighted material" sign on the side. In my opinion, they should have scanned the public domain version of the novel -- like what Gutenberg does...

    S
  • Holy copyright imbroglio! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bigtallmofo (695287) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:41AM (#11998552)
    (http://www.insurancegenius.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday March 22 2005, @07:26PM)
    From the Harvard FAQ at: http://hul.harvard.edu/publications/041213faq.html [harvard.edu]...

    Will this include books still in copyright? Google will be scanning books that are in as well as out of copyright from the Harvard collections. Harvard-owned books in the public domain will be available in the search results. Google may choose to display descriptive catalog information for books that are still under copyright. We believe that Google's treatment of in-copyright works is consistent with copyright law.

    If I'm reading this correctly, that Google is placing the text of copyrighted works into a freely searchable and viewable database, it's an amazingly brazen step. It's also incredibly useful, but I can't imagine book publishers lying down for this. Add to this Disney's propensity for lobbying for extending copyrights everytime Mickey Mouse comes up for entering the public domain and I think we're headed for an interesting copyright showdown.
  • Holy Bible? by OAB_X (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:41AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by diegocgteleline.es (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:45AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 21 2005, @09:47AM (#11998631)
      Probably because it isn't just called the Holy Bible in the collection.

      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=book+King +James&btnG=Search [google.com]

      However, I'm pretty sure you were just trolling.... Otherwise you would look for a specific VERSION of the bible!
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Holy Bible? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Total_Wimp (564548) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:02AM (#11998794)
        Thanks for the info, but he wan't trolling. It was one of the first books I checked for and amazingly "bible" and "the bible" do not yeild the desired results either. It's a little surprising to have to be so specific for this particular book.

        TW
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Holy Bible? (Score:4, Funny)

          by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Monday March 21 2005, @11:06AM (#11999612)

          It was one of the first books I checked for and amazingly "bible" and "the bible" do not yeild the desired results either.

          That's what Christians get for naming their authoritative religious work "The Bible." All of you looking to start a new religion take note. Bad titles for your religious text include: The Book, The Writing, The Text, and The Bound Stack of Paper.

          P.S. The number of older texts that include the word "bible" is similar to the number of contemporary works that include the word "book."

          [ Parent ]
        • Re:Holy Bible? by Johnny Mnemonic (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @12:17PM
        • Re:Holy Bible? by PantsWearer (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @02:57PM
          • Re:Holy Bible? by Total_Wimp (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @03:48PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Holy Bible? by OAB_X (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:48AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Holy Bible? by yincrash (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:21AM
      • Re:Holy Bible? by SpongeBobLinuxPants (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @11:26AM
      • Check your own results by KalvinB (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @12:22PM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by Stephen Williams (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:06AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by Stonehand (Score:3) Monday March 21 2005, @10:13AM
      • Re:Holy Bible? by Stephen Williams (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:19AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by angst7 (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:14AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by jonadab (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:19AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by micromoog (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:25AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by Total_Wimp (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:06AM
    • Re:Holy Bible? by Scott7477 (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:32AM
      • Re:Holy Bible? by OAB_X (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:40AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Holy Bible? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @05:52PM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • what full text??? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wes33 (698200) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:43AM (#11998581)
    when I clicked the link for "origin of species" the google-book results are links to books you can **buy** with a small number of sample pages to look at.

    After the google-books results, you get the ordinary google results, some of which *do* link to online texts.

    To find Darwin's book on line to read, rather than buy, just use regular google. Book search seems to be just a commercial venture.

    Or am I missing something?
  • Am I Missing Something by BaltoAaron (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:44AM
    • YES. by daniil (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:11AM
  • You know what would be great? by Alex978 (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:45AM
  • No Right Click by Luke Psywalker (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:45AM
  • Can't read these books in full by ilyaaohell (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:45AM
  • not Full-Text! (Score:5, Informative)

    by LMCBoy (185365) * on Monday March 21 2005, @09:46AM (#11998611)
    (http://www.30doradus.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday September 25 2002, @12:31AM)
    Not one of the linked titles contains the full text of the book! Each shows only a few pages.
    From the "About Google Print" page:

    (you can view the entirety of public domain books or, for books under copyright, just a few pages or in some cases, only the titles bibliographic data and brief snippets)

    However, it seems to consider every title to be "under copyright". I mean, Romeo and Juliet is centuries old, and surely in the public domain. If it's considered copyrighted, then just about everything will be.

    Anyway, if you want free e-texts, Project Gutenberg [gutenberg.org] is a great resource.
  • Copyright / licensing issues by cyberjessy (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:46AM
  • No copyright infringement... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 21 2005, @09:47AM (#11998624)
    If you go to Google and read about this project, you'll quickly notice that unless the books are in the public domain, you won't be able to read the entire book online. This purpose of the project is the enable people to quickly _find_ books, not read them entirely online. Once you've found a desired book by using Google, you'll most likely have to go to a library and check the book out or buy it...
  • Oliver Twist is copyrighted? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by WareW01f (18905) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:48AM (#11998640)
    Last I checked Oliver Twist [gutenberg.org] was written by Charles Dickens [wikipedia.org] whose been dead for over 125 years. I was sure this fell under public domain, but I could be wrong.

    Makes you wonder. At some point here there's going to start to be battles over who owns the rights to sections of the bible! Where will it end? (might clean up the 10 commandments issues as a simple copyright infringment. :)
  • Adblock may block images by erykjj (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:48AM
  • Appropriate format? by AC-x (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:49AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Free books HELPS sales! by Tsu Dho Nimh (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:49AM
  • *if* (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ecotax (303198) on Monday March 21 2005, @09:49AM (#11998653)
    It'll be interestin to see how publishers deal with this if demand for these books declines.

    That's a very big if indeed - I wouldn't want to read a 300-page book from screen if it's still available in print.
    The decrease in sales to people who would (will) do so, could very well be compensated by the increase in sales from people who wouldn't have known about a certain book otherwise.
  • Can't read whole book by invisik (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:50AM
  • Right-Click by Darman (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:50AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Team With Gutenberg by Lordofohio (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:51AM
  • Origin of Species still copyrighted? by raytracer (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @09:51AM
  • creative commons and GPL by minus_273 (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:54AM
    • Re:MOD DOWN by minus_273 (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @12:15PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • I had no idea... by Reignking (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:55AM
  • Bad scans by gleather (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @09:59AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Great Books by scottennis (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:02AM
  • Careful which books you read citizen by AndroidCat (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:03AM
  • Plain Text Please (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DoorFrame (22108) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:05AM (#11998825)
    (http://www.rumorsdaily.com/)
    I don't really see the utility of this besides the ability to search within a book. First of all, you don't get a plain text version, so I can't download it and read it offline. Secondly, most of these books are already covered by Project Guttenburg which does provide plain text versions that you can download to a PDA and read at your leisure.

    Now, I readily admit I'm one of the few people who enjoys reading books off a PDA, but even I hate reading books on a regular computer screen. I don't think there's many people who will sit down and read long treatises this way. I could be wrong, but it seems unlikely.

    Also, the system doesn't seem to let you jump quickly and easily within a book. There's no "Go to page X" ability, you can only move slowly forward and backward from a handful of starting positions.

    This just doesn't seem very helpful (again, except if you're looking for a quote within a book and you want to search for it... this while be great for that).
  • Controversial? by northcat (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:05AM
  • My suggestion by WormholeFiend (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:07AM
  • excellent framing by AC by Zarn (Score:1) Monday March 21 2005, @10:08AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • "The origin of species" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Zayin (91850) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:09AM (#11998886)

    For instance, book origin of species will turn up the full text of Charles Darwin's controversial treatise.

    I think it's sad that "The origin of species" is referred to as controversial. What's next, Newton's "Principia Mathematica" considered controversial?

  • I recommend The Machine Stops by wcrowe (Score:2) Monday March 21 2005, @10:11AM
  • Controversial? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by acb (2797) on Monday March 21 2005, @10:12AM (#11998922)
    (http://dev.null.org/)
    In most parts of the world, Origin of Species hasn't been controversial for well over a century.