[blindlaw] West Publishing

Steve Jacobson steve.jacobson at visi.com
Thu Sep 2 03:38:35 UTC 2010 

Jim,

I don't know to what you are responding in the beginning nor do I know what you are responding to here for certain.  At 
least most of us are not seeing accessibility as a denial of the right for an author to earn something.  Since we are a 
small market, I believe we also have the right to manipulate the market such that we can have an impact.  An author 
has the right to distribute inaccessible electronic books to colleges, but we have a right to make it difficult.  Sometimes 
rights collide.  From what you have written before, in a perfect world, all authors would use the procedure you say you 
have developed and everything would be accessible, and presumably you might earn some income in the process. I 
don't even have a problem with that, but I won't assume your system is a perfect one just because you tell us that it is.  I 
assume that some of what you are writing here is to set the stage for that solution.  You seem to be forgetting, though, 
that public libraries exist.  While I don't feel that an author owes me a free copy of a work, I also think that BookShare, 
for example, functions as a sort of library.  In another perfect world, should downloaded books be timed so copies can't 
be kept permanently?  They probably should, but this also increases the complexities of systems and adds to the cost.  I 
would also point out to you that at least for now, an author cannot truly prevent someone from lending a hard-copy book 
to someone else or even trading hardcopy books.  They can't prevent a sighted person from going to a library and 
repeatedly referring to a book or checking it out multiple times.  Authors will gain more control with electronic books, but 
there have always been loopholes in the system.  I don't think it is fair to paint accessibility as the only source of 
loopholes even though I admit that there are some.  Until recently, we really have not been in a position to have 
purchased books do much for us so we've been dependent upon the library lending model.  This is likely to be changing 
and already has to some degree, but it will take us time to get used to it.  I will also tell you that when I was in college, I 
was required to buy three copies of every textbook to have it converted into braille or recorded on tape.  Those authors 
did pretty well by me.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobson

On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 21:43:49 -0500, James Pepper wrote:

>So why is it OK for you to charge for you effort but not an author?
>  Why should publishers build companies, hire people to make books,
>distribut those books, advertise them, warehouse them, why shouldn't they
>get paid for their effort?


>On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:30 PM, E.J. Zufelt <lists at zufelt.ca> wrote:

>> Good evening James,
>>
>> I am not ok with you taking away all of my assets from "thinking".  I am ok
>> with you doing whatever you like with any intellectual property of mine that
>> I create and you find a copy of.  Take my articles, take my source code, and
>> use them to your benefit.
>>
>> Should you need my assistance with something, or wish to hire me, I would
>> be happy to charge you for my time, something that is finite and which
>> cannot be duplicated.  But, once you have paid me for my time, do whatever
>> you'd like with the product of my labour.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Everett Zufelt
>> http://zufelt.ca
>>
>> Follow me on Twitter
>> http://twitter.com/ezufelt
>>
>> View my LinkedIn Profile
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ezufelt
>>
>>
>>
>>  On 2010-09-01, at 10:18 PM, James Pepper wrote:
>>
>> > So you are ok with me taking away all of your assets that you have
>> > accumulated in your lifetime from thinking.  So if you are a lawyer,
>> > everything you ever did, all of the cases, all of that effort is free and
>> > you never charged anyone for your work.
>> > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:50 PM, E.J. Zufelt <lists at zufelt.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Good evening James,
>> >>
>> >> As I am sure you are aware there is a difference between real property,
>> >> chattel, and intellectual property.  So, feel free to "take away" all of
>> my
>> >> intellectual property, I don't want it, only the benefit of its use
>> (which
>> >> all can share simultaneously), Please don't take away my real property
>> or
>> >> chattel, I'm not done with it yet... but you can have it when I am.
>> >>
>> >> More seriously, I was wondering if you, or anyone else, can explain to
>> me
>> >> why they think there is actually a benefit to society as a whole to
>> having
>> >> intellectual content treated as property? I would also be interested in
>> >> hearing why intellectual property should all be in the public domain.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Everett Zufelt
>> >> http://zufelt.ca
>> >>
>> >> Follow me on Twitter
>> >> http://twitter.com/ezufelt
>> >>
>> >> View my LinkedIn Profile
>> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ezufelt
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 2010-09-01, at 9:42 PM, James Pepper wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Well if you want to give away other people's property then what stops
>> >> anyone
>> >>> from taking everything you own in the name of fairness.  After all you
>> >> are
>> >>> not using it to the best advantage, I can use it better.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:35 PM, James Pepper <b75205 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> The law for accessibility in documents is Section 508 and you can lay
>> >> out
>> >>>> your content correctly and still not be accessible.  The problem here
>> is
>> >>>> that there is no clear cut solution, whereas with a wheel chair ramp
>> the
>> >>>> solution is obvious, you build it, but with accessibility in
>> electronic
>> >>>> documents all you have to do is prove that the doucment is section 508
>> >>>> compliant and that is that.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Section 508 is not accessibility.  We all know this right here on this
>> >>>> list.  What is needed is a definition of accessibility that is a real
>> >>>> solution and is not a plessy versus ferguson type of situation where
>> >> people
>> >>>> claim that accessibility is in existence but it doesn't actually work.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> We are in the same boat.  The problem which has not been defined and I
>> >>>> define it here, is that software companies are only concerned with the
>> >>>> solution as it holds for their own software, they seek out section 508
>> >>>> compliance and that is all they can do.  They do not make their
>> content
>> >>>> accessible to a wide range of products because you cannot anticipate
>> all
>> >> of
>> >>>> the scenarios and so we are stuck in this situation where a publisher
>> >> can
>> >>>> lay out their content as accessible in section 508 and yet be
>> completely
>> >>>> inaccessible when it gets to market.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There are so many variables that it is a miracle that anything is
>> >>>> accessible.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But if you want it to work every time, you will have to pay for it.
>>  And
>> >>>> don't look now but when a company makes its ramps accessible to the
>> >> disabled
>> >>>> that cost is recouped in the price of their product but you guys want
>> >> them
>> >>>> to give away books for free. Should houses be free for the blind, give
>> >> away
>> >>>> free cars.   I think we should re-evaluate this free book plan because
>> >> there
>> >>>> is no incentive to innovate in accessibility.  Why should anyone fix
>> >> this if
>> >>>> there is no benefit other than a pat on the back to solve this
>> problem?
>> >> You
>> >>>> want your books for free, so does everyone else.
>> >>>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> blindlaw mailing list
>> >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> >> blindlaw:
>> >>>
>> >>
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lists%40zufelt.ca
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> blindlaw mailing list
>> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> >> blindlaw:
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > blindlaw mailing list
>> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> >
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lists%40zufelt.ca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>>
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com
>>
>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com

More information about the BlindLaw mailing list