Comments on: Evolution of the E-book Market

By: James Kendrick

James Kendrick — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:49:30 +0000

I have spoken at length with Barnes & Noble and their plans for e-books are quite comprehensive. I like their approach to produce their own reader software, e. g. eReader or the B&N reader for the iPhone. That, coupled with selling their own content puts them firmly in control of the deals with publishers to make this happen. It also avoids any potential for Apple to kill the content.

By: Paul Kim

Paul Kim — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:19:30 +0000

Thanks!

By: Michael Wolf

Michael Wolf — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 05:20:51 +0000

@Paul – I will bug Paul to tell you what he knows

By: Paul Kim

Paul Kim — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:24:14 +0000

Great briefing, but it doesn’t seem to cover one of the prominent book sellers — Borders. Do you know anything about their plans?

By: texasyellowdog

texasyellowdog — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:30:39 +0000

Here’s another, probably the worst yet (from Daring Fireball):

“But Ninjawords for iPhone suffers one humiliating flaw: it omits all the words deemed “objectionable” by Apple’s App Store reviewers, despite the fact that Ninjawords carries a 17+ rating.

Apple censored an English dictionary.

A dictionary. A reference book. For words contained in all reasonable dictionaries. For words contained in dictionaries that are used every day in elementary school libraries and classrooms.”

By: Paul Sweeting

Paul Sweeting — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 01:59:54 +0000

The issue has already come up. Apple delayed approval of the Eucalyptus iPhone app that allows users to read public domain books digitized by Project Gutenberg because the collection included a text-only version of a Victorian-era translation of the Kama Sutra, which Apple deemed too racy for the delicate sensibilities of iPhone users. It was only under pressure of mockery that the app was ultimately approved.

By: Celeste LeCompte

Celeste LeCompte — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 23:42:02 +0000

I have to agree with you — I think that Apple’s content-vetting won’t mesh well with book sales; there’s plenty of “risque” content out there that isn’t pornography. I just don’t see Apple as being a formidable competitor in the book-reading space.

That said, magazine content could be the big win for Apple should it enter this market — great graphics and design are hallmarks of the best magazines, and the web isn’t kind to the sort of longer-form content at which magazines excel. Seems like a good potential match up to me, though i wonder what the financial picture would look like. Maybe Conde Nast should give Apple a call.

By: texasyellowdog

texasyellowdog — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:01:32 +0000

Most censorship will get them in trouble with book buyers. Unless you can explain the app store obsession with some content, I will remain skeptical.

By: Michael Wolf

Michael Wolf — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:28:19 +0000

@texasyellowdog – I think, as with music and movies sold through iTunes, they would probably not have a problem with artistic efforts such as books that have mature content. Most books are probably ok for selling through an Apple storefront, except outright obscene content such as pornography.

By: texasyellowdog

texasyellowdog — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:24:46 +0000

Apple has been notoriously shy of iPhone apps with sexual content:

“applications may not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind.”

If they want to get in the book business, they will have to get over this hang-up.