16% - public domain (older works)
9% - copyrighted and in print
75% - copyrighted, but out of print (aka "Orphaned Works")
I've been aware of the issue of orphaned works, but I had no idea that it was such a large percentage. Apparently the vast majority of content produced is considered commercially non-viable over the long haul. But how can we make sure that these works aren't locked away just because they generate enough of a revenue?
This is especially critical for academic institutions because scholars are notorious for wanting access to those obscure books that few others need. Not being able to access them easily leads to either extended checkout times from the library (for years at a time) or to rampant photocopying.
Heaven knows I don't want to put any publisher out of business, but I think it would be nice if they could be persuaded to release some items back to the author or into Creative Commons...or if they embraced an iTunes distribution model where you could download PDF books for a reasonable cost (I'm thinking $.99 to $4.99 myself).
I'll just tell one story - I was really interested in buying a research book on multicultural mathematical systems...but it was $300! Still haven't bought it, and I imagine that most purchasers are university libraries.
Imagine if I could download it for a fraction of the cost for an unbound copy. I bet that there would be plenty of researchers or math/anthropologist junkies would get it. An instructor could justify asking students to buy the book instead of reading chapters via Electronic Reserve (or having the instructor upload a scanned copy in some file space). Imagine the extra revenue that might be generated.
Am I just dreaming?
Comments
Solutions?
Urge legislators to reduce copyright to a reasonable length and/or require copyright holders to have to pay to enable copyright? If we move the wheel back on copyright towards what was originally created and intended, you get a more sane, rational way of handling copyright. Making copyrights non-tranferable from the artist and/or terminating copyright on death could improve the situation.
Failing to reign in copyright will lead to its irrelevance, ex.: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080401-pirate-bay-on-ifpi-lawsuit-labels-can-go-screw-themselves.html
Note the institution of 'Student Bay' and think about how *that* will affect text book publishers...
Also, copyright holders have to (re)design revenue streams, ala Trent: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080305-reznor-makes-750000-even-when-the-music-is-free.html
Maybe more examples like Trent can change text book publisher's minds.
Hope not
My key takeaway from Lessig's talk was that there is a continuum or a middle ground to be found in this stuff. There must be a sane, rational way of handling the copyright question such that not everything is either free and open, or closed and costly.