At first I was skeptical about e-readers. I love books and I love the tactile, page turning part of them. I am now an e-reader convert but it took some time and a few false starts.
My first e-reader was my iPad, using the Kindle application. The iPad is a great e-reader: the screen is bright, the “page size” is good and the interface is completely intuitive, using the touchscreen to its full advantage. The Kindle app is seamless. You can buy a book on Amazon, have it downloaded and be reading it in a minute or less. I have wireless and 3G on my iPad which makes it easy to get a book anywhere. The only downsides are that the iPad is pretty heavy compared to devices that are just e-readers, weighing in at 1 1/2 pounds. A better choice would be to use the iPad Touch or the iPhone with the Kindle app because then you get the quality of the screen in a smaller, lighter package plus the wireless access.
My brother introduce me to the Kindle. He likes it because he can download the newspaper and pack a couple of books on it when he’s traveling. Compared to the iPad, the screen is more like “paper” and less like a computer screen. Personally, I prefer the iPad’s brightness but the electronic ink used by the Kindle is very readable. The unit is smaller and lighter than the iPad too. The Kindle makes buying books very easy. In fact, it was my first choice for my mother (not very technical) and she’s enjoyed it tremendously.
The problem with the Kindle is that it is not compatible with the digital books available from the library. I consume a lot of books and am on a first name basis with the staff of two local libraries. I didn’t want to buy every book that I read, even if they don’t take up much space when they are digital. The Kindle holds about 3,500 books and the wireless version weighs about 8 1/2 ounces.
So, when I decided to buy an e-reader, I bought the Barnes & Noble Nook.
The Nook is a lot like the Kindle (I bought mine before the color version came out). It has a slightly larger screen than the Kindle and instead of a keyboard has a pseudo touch screen interface. I say pseudo because you still need to use the scroll buttons on the side of the unit. It’s not a touch screen the way an iPad is one.
I haven’t used the Kindle enough to compare the readability of the screen to the Nook but I found the Nook to be a bit gray and the type not as sharp as compared to my iPad. Like the Kindle, you “flip the pages” using a button on the side of the screen. On the Nook there are two on each side allowing you to go both backwards and forwards. It’s not ideal, but you get used to it. The Nook has less memory than the Kindle (about 1,500 books) but probably enough for most people — and for those who need more you can use an SD card to add memory. It’s slightly heavier than the Kindle, weighing in at 11 1/2 ounces.
I read a half dozen books on my Nook but didn’t love it.
Then I saw the new Pocket Reader (PRS-350) from Sony. I thought it would be the ticket and for me, it’s the best solution. Like the iPad it has a true touch screen interface. That means that the unit can be very small (pocket book sized) because it’s all screen. It’s very light weight (4 1/2 ounces) and easy to slip into a purse or briefcase. Like the Nook it holds about 1,500 books.
You turn the pages by running your finger across the screen (just like the iPad). I find the quality of the electronic ink to be better than the Nook and although the screen is smaller so you have to turn the pages more frequently, the interface makes it easy.
Like the Nook, the Sony e-readers are compatible with library books. I’ve downloaded and read about a dozen books so far and the process is easy.
The Sony E-reader had a metal case which has a more polished appearance than either the Nook or the Kindle. Mine is pink but it also comes in silver and blue.
Is there a downside? Potentially there are two. First, the Sony PRS-350 has no wireless capability. The only way to put a book on it is to sync it with your computer. I don’t have a problem with this but it means you can’t download a book on the fly; you need to plan ahead. The second issue is that the Sony library is not as extensive as Amazon or Barnes & Noble.
My conclusion? If you want to read library books the Sony PRs-350 is great. Because it’s so light, I take it with me everywhere; I just load my books ahead of time.
If you don’t care about having free books, the Kindle and the Nook are both very good choices. But personally, I’d go with an Apple product — iPad, iPod touch or iPhone depending on your need. Yes, the screens on the iPod and iPhone are smaller but the interface is so nice that it’s worth the trade off (in fact, I know a few people who have gone this route, and find their Kindles are getting left at home).
Filed under: commentary, Ebooks, Ipad, e-readers, iPad Touch, iPhone, Kindle, Nook, Sony PRS-350
August 24, 2011 • 2:51 pm 0
Think you can use that photo you found on the web? Think again!
It is way too easy to find images on the web. Go onto Google images and you can links to thousands of pictures. But can you use them? Not without permission.
Many people don’t realize that even if an image does not carry a copyright mark, the right to use the image belongs to the photographer. So, you can’t grab an image off the ‘net without permission and you also can’t hotlink to an image on someone else’s site.
What about the concept of “Fair Use”
Fair Use allows copyrighted materials to be used for specific purposes. Fair Use is, however, does not provide a blanket excuse for using copyrighted work without permission and it is far more limited than many people realize.
Fair Use is covered in Section 107 of the Copyright Act.
What does that mean? Doesn’t it say materials can be used for news reporting?
Yes and no. The first factor looks the new work, created by using the copyrighted materials, and evaluates it based on whether it is used for non-profit/educational purposes or is commercial in nature (preference is given for non-commercial use); whether it is used for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research (also linked back to the commercial/non profit element) and whether the new work is transformative (giving new meaning to the work) or merely illustrative. For example, if you use a photograph as part of a product review or commentary, you have created something new. In the case of photos used on www.lolcats.com, I suspect that the addition of the captions is considered transformative. However, if you use a photo to support an article, the copy may not have added new expression or meaning to the image.
The second factor looks at whether the materials are worthy of copyright protection. In the case of photography, that actually happens the moment the photographer presses the shutter. Even if a photograph is not marked with a copyright statement it belongs to the photographer until he sells its use.
The third factor looks at how much of the work is used. Ideally you should use as little as possible of the original work — excerpting just enough to make your point. The subfactors include evaluating the quantity, quality and importance of the work used. For example, you can quote from a speech, especially when using the quotes in a new context, but you cannot reproduce an entire book. With a photograph, that concept is trickier.
The fourth factor considers whether the use of the material will harm the commercial value of the original material to the copyright owner. In the example above, the website included a photograph on its site that the photographer was selling to similar sites. This has the potential to harm the copyright owner because other people might not feel the need to buy the image either. Depriving the copyright owner of income is usually an indication that the materials do not fall under the Fair Use doctrine.
If you have any concerns about your own use of copyrighted materials, use one of the Fair Use evaluator tools to help you consider your use against the four factors discussed above.
Best Practices “Fair Use” of Copyrighted Materials
If you think your use of materials is “Fair Use” then there are certain protocols that you should follow. The most obvious first step is to ask permission. Many photographers will let you use an image on your blog, especially if you are a “hobby” blog with no commercial interests. Additionally, as was discussed earlier, don’t hotlink to images on someone else’s site. You should upload the images to your own site and then provide a text link back to the source.
I found these “best practices” recommendations on the blog A Photo Editor.
What does this mean for you and your clients?
To keep on the right side of copyright law you should never use a photograph without paying for the use or obtaining permission to use the photograph . . . in writing.
Make sure that when you purchase the use of a photograph that you spell out all possible uses and time periods that the image will be part of your/your clients’ materials. Over the years we’ve found that once an image is incorporated into marketing materials it “pops up” in other places because internal staff doesn’t realize that buying the use for the image in a brochure doesn’t mean that it can be used for an ad, or on the website.
In fact, here’s a real-life example of how a company got caught using an image downloaded from the web — and how much it ended up costing their agency.
Legal lesson learned: Copywriter pays $4000 for $10 photo
http://blog.webcopyplus.com/2011/02/14/legal-lesson-learned-copywriter-pays-4000-for-10-photo/
Filed under: blogging, commentary, copyright infringement, Fair Use of images