I came across an article that discusses the social reading evolution that e-books are currently going through. In the article, I think it is interesting how e-books are not referred to as being e-books, but rather as “socialbooks”. The article states that e-books are now more frequently being used to connect with others so that friends can share reading experiences with one another. It also shares the idea that book reading is no longer an activity to be performed in solitude, instead stating that “the idea that we read be ourselves is a relatively recent idea and is going to go away”. Personally, I’m a little upset by the idea that one day reading might not be the solitary, personal activity it is today. Although there are probably a lot of upsides to these “socialbooks”, for me reading alone is the most enjoyable thing.

Technology in a general sense, is meant to make things easier and more convenient for uses and consumers. Regular physical books have their perks, but it would be hard to deny the convenience brought on by e-books. Naturally, the first is space. Aside from the reader used to store and access them, e-books take up no physical space. On my kindle I have a few tens of books, all of which fit neatly into my coat pocket. Furthermore, if I am on a roll with reading, but finish a book, it is a simple matter to access another e-book and continue. With a regular book, accessing another would require being in the same room, giving a limit to area.

As much as I vouched for physical copies in other posts, I am glad to have my kindle for my anytime reading needs.

After reading some blog posts this week, I became curious as too the laws of copyright for photography.  I came across this blog which begins with an interview with an attorney, Carolyn E. Wright, who focuses on the needs of photographers.  In the interview, Carolyn E. Wright says, “When photographers take photos of people, they must be careful to not invade their privacy. This happens when someone enters a person’s private domain in a manner that would be considered offensive to the average person.”  Wright also says that some courts have found photographs taken in public to be a violation of privacy rights. I know that I wouldn’t want to be unknowingly photographed in public and have my picture shared without my knowledge.

With the start of the Major League Baseball season I have been looking for ways to watch the games.  I found a way which I would have to pay 20 dollars a month for, but there are no free options.  I also realized that this service (MLB TV) was the only one that offers to stream the games.  This got me thinking about the copyright laws that are probably involved with MLB TV.  Since there are no other services this MLB TV must have the exclusive rights to film the games and stream them online.  I already knew it was illegal to tape a game on TV but this made me realize that it is probably illegal for any company aside from MLB TV to stream the games live.  How does this work though?

Link to MLB TV website

Link

The article attached above contains a concept that seems contradictory to itself and impossible.  A library without books seems like a notion that is similar to playing basketball without a ball or hoops.  However, e-books are being used instead of books.  This just goes to show how e-books are redefining how books are used.

With all the technology that is used in the present it has become difficult to decipher what is breaking copyright and what is not.  Last class when a student asked if something was actually infringing upon copyright the response was “I don’t know.”  This begs the question does anyone actually explicitly know the limits of the copyright laws?  The laws are so complex that there is no way of knowing what is copyright infringement.  This undoubtedly leads to violations of the law even if the individual has no idea that they are violating it.  There have been many ideas to try and limit copyright infringement as suggested in Copyright Highway with the description of a celestial jukebox.  However, even if a method to enforce the laws are created the laws are too broad and misunderstood to convict a large number of people.

For anyone who has used or tried to use HBO Go subscriptions, you might find this clip from College Humor funny. In class on Tuesday we discussed how companies such as Netflix charge a fixed rate before users can assess the content. HBO Go is similar, except that if you already have HBO through your television provider, you can get it for free by putting in that password.

I find this clip funny because many of my friends have had similar experiences trying to watch The Newsroom. Friends were using friends’ passwords to watch it. People were trying to find someone who was willing to share the password. I never hear of people sharing their Netflix passwords. What has caused the difference between HBO Go and Netflix?