I think the important thing to note is that the author is not complaining that Apple wants a cut. The author is complaining that you have to do it through the App Store. And in that regard, I do agree that this case is unprecedented, that a EULA restricts the distribution channel.
The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
71–80 of 143 posts
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#72I think this guy is wrong. He's mixing apples and oranges when it comes to who owns what. Apple is requiring people who use its software to create an e-book to give Apple a cut of the proceeds of the Apple created e-book . The author still owns his or her content. If you want to sell your book, just don't sell the form of the book made by Apple's software. You can still sell a PDF, for example. Or you can sell your W…
The author is not saying that apple does not deserve a cut. He is noting that it is questionable whether Apple should be allowed to restrict the distribution channel
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#73I'm not seeing why this is so unreasonable, if someone could fill me in. The program is for creating iBooks, not eBooks, to be sold through their iBookstore. I'm seeing these more as apps than something like .ePub files or .PDFs. Unlike apps though, which require an developer license to load yourself, Author gives anyone the ability to run these books on your iPad. It also gives anyone the ability to distribute an iB…
"It also gives anyone the ability to distribute an iBook outside the iBookstore."
That is exactly what the author complains about, you cannot distribute an iBook outside the store:
"if your Work is provided for a fee (including as part of any subscription-based product or service), you may only distribute the Work through Apple and such distribution is subject to the following limitations and conditions"
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#74Initially I had an unfavorable opinion on this. But I started thinking about game engines: When you use the Unreal or Unity game engine authoring tools, you don't expect to be able to sell your game without giving the game engine company a cut. It might be a flat rate, but that's basically the same thing. Apple are providing authoring tools for their "iBooks 2" engine and are not out of line expecting a cut of the pr…
from nchuhoai (somewhere in the comment threads):
The author is not saying that apple does not deserve a cut. He is noting that it is questionable whether Apple should be allowed to restrict the distribution channel
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#75Can someone explain this a bit better to me?
Let's say I write a book called "My Awesome Comments from HackerNews, Unabridged" (MACFHU) using Microsoft Word.
And I send that to my publisher, retaining all rights to publish the book still.
Then I adapt MACFHU for iBooks using the iBook Author tool. Would I then be prohibited from selling my book in the iBookstore because it's already available in hardcover? If I published it first in iBookstore, would my publisher be prohibited from publishing it in hardcover?
Or does the iBooks EULA basically say: "This is a specialized tool that you should use to publish books on the iPad." You can certainly publish your content on other platforms as well, but you'll need to format it using other tools. Check out InDesign, for instance.
I need some clarification.
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#76Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It is intended to keep authors/editors artificially locked into Apple's products and distribution system. There is no artificial lock in. They are providing a tool to produce content for their distribution system. That's its point. The comparison to general purpose tools isn't relevant. Consider if this tool, like iAd Producer, had no ability to export in a format outside of Apple's proprietary one. Would you still…
The lock-in would be complete if they change iBooks to only display books that have been published with their variant of epub classes. They don't do this, so would have to agree that you can produce your book any way you want then make it available. I believe the original author's pain is around the paucity of good EPUB publishing tools, and to have one appear with these restrictions makes them sad. It would have bee…
"Clearly Apple sees this as a way to build a library of 'exclusive' content in iBooks and mute the Kindle threat. For me at least that shows me just how threatening the Kindle Fire is to their model."
iBooks Author is not a reaction to the Kindle Fire. Apple has been working on this since before there were rumors that Amazon was going to introduce a tablet of their own.
Steve Jobs even told his biographer about it [1]. Jobs passed away in October, a week after Amazon announced the Kindle Fire.
[1] http://venturebeat.com/2012/01/19/digital-textbooks-fulfills...
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
The icky feeling comes from the hypothetical transitivity of such an agreement. It seems like a great way to bootstrap a pseudo-feudal obligation system. What if everything you made with the OS was similarly hindered? Launch an auto update that effectively bricks your device unless you agree to the new EULA, blah blah nightmare scenario here. Less hyperbolically, it's like the first concrete step into killing the fre…
I'm just guessing here, but if you write a textbook and get published by a traditional publisher (McGraw-Hill, etc.), they probably disallow you from creating a copy of that same book and selling it for $5 from your own marketplace. They check it for quality, help create the physical book, and put their name on it. They even have some ownership. I'm simply seeing Apple as a publishing partner here. They're helping yo…
As an iOS 'fanboy' i have to tell you that both iOS and Android have a "kill switch". It's a measure for the really dangerous cases and Google has used it once or twice, and i guess Apple too (not shure atm). When jailbroken, you can turn it off on both platforms.
But you are right in that there seems to be no such thing for books, unlike on Amazon (remember the 1984 case?)
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#79Over the years I've seen a large volume of creative software, often free, that is used to produce output, that requires, as part of its license, that you give the creator of the software a cut if you sell any of the things you make with it. This includes everything that is "free for non-commercial use", such as, if I recall correctly, Blender (in the past), most of the Free Fonts out there, and a lot of free software…
You make some excellent points. However, there is room to critize Apple for not making that particular clause absolutely crystal clear instead of merely including it in a EULA which the vast majority of users will never look at. Also, while your anology to the FSF is technically correct, I think it is safe to say that the FSF as currently governed would not do that. So, while your point is valid, it is a bit misleadi…
It's right on the dialog where you publish your document, not just buried in the EULA.
Re: The Audacity of the iBooks Author EULA
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the hidden fee?
Be direct. Are you arguing that this is not a fee or that it's not hidden?
It's neither.
You can produce all the books you want and give them away for free, without paying Apple a fee of any kind, and the notice is prominently displayed right on the screen where you publish your document.
This is no different from the zillions of dual-licensed GPL projects out there that say (roughly) "You're free to use this code in projects that you yourself give away for free, but if you want to sell your application you have to buy a license from us".
Again, I don't like this myself, but let's not make it out to be worse than it is.