Today I sat in on an interesting meeting with two reps from Baker & Taylor. They were at SLS to demo their new ebook product, ED (which stands for Electronic Delivery). While their site looks nice and they have the general idea at this stage of the game, the meeting illustrated everything that is wrong with Digital Rights Management (DRM), ebooks, and publisher paranoia.

Before I rant, though, let me be clear that I think it's great B&T is trying to forge a path here, it's just that the environment in which they are trying to do it is not conducive to a proper implementation. They're on the right track because they let patrons download current, popular fiction and nonfiction titles directly onto their computers and PDAs, but there are definite problems that are out of B&T's control. Also, their reps were good, they were honest about questions we asked for which they had no answer, and they promised to get answers. But the problems... oy.

It's not shocking that they're using Adobe PDF to circulate titles, as it is the most ubiquitous and cross-platform of the formats other than plain text and it has embedded DRM, but we immediately ran into trouble because of it. I leave the dissecting of PDFs to others (David and Dorothea have both spoken to the issues surrounding the format), but here's something I never expected to run into because of Adobe.

If SLS is involved with this product, it will be as the agent for a group purchase by our member libraries. Naturally, each library is going to want to "brand" the ED site with its own logo and a link back to the library's web site. This is what we call "standard operating procedure," as it helps patrons navigate back and forth and allows the library a little PR. However, we were told today that this would be possible only at great expense because Adobe would require that each branded site be considered separately, which would mean a separate Adobe offline reader for each one. Guess how much that would cost? Go on, guess.

Around $695. Each. Just to have a logo and a link to the library's site on ED's pages! I still can't explain exactly why this is, as I don't understand it myself, but I'd love to find out what kind of crack Adobe is smoking.

Forget for a moment the problems some of the DRM caused even just during the demo. Forget the fact that PDFs are a proprietary format, and let's just say the libraries don't care about a logo and link. The next biggest problem? Defining the word "own." It's like having Clinton define the word "sex."

After much debate, we came to the conclusion that if a library purchases titles from ED, it does indeed own them. However, if it stops subscribing to the service, if ED folds the way Gemstar did, or if PDFs are replaced by another format, the library will "own" a file that is completely and utterly useless. You can only download the file from the ED site into an offline reader, and the content automatically expires after a pre-determined date. Even if you set that date to be 1,000 years from now, the title is stuck in that one copy of the offline reader. You can't circulate it, you can't print a paper copy of it, and you can't move it anywhere else. If the hard drive crashes, then you own a file you can't even look at anymore.

I have a real problem with that, as do consumers, libraries, and anyone other than publishers involved with ebooks. This is exactly the kind of mentality that is regressing the ebook movement. The next time someone asks why ebooks aren't taking off, ask them to look up the word "own" in the dictionary.

Until publishers figure out that this isn't going to fly, especially with libraries that have precious few dollars to begin with, you'll continue to see ebooks mainly in one place, the movies.

Wow - sit down to my aggregator and see... a rant about the evils of aggregators from Steven J. Bell. It was followed by a defense from Steven Cohen, but I want to add one more thought to the mix.

I've already read and heard all of Steven Bell's complaints about aggregators before.* The year was 1996, and I was having a heck of a time getting my colleagues to understand why they needed to pay attention to this crazy "email" thing, and that's when I was trying to teach them how to use Pine! Steven's comments are typical for a nascent technology and could be applied to email, web browsers, blogging, cell phones, Microsoft Windows, and just about anything else you can plug in to an electrical outlet or double-click on a desktop.

At SLS, we say that it takes three years to get from the introduction of a topic to the buy-in and understanding for implementation. For example, we've been trying to go paperless in our communications with our member libraries for a few years. Due to severe budget cuts, we're being forced to do it now, but our members are ready because we've been preparing them, nudging them, educating them, leading them. "Email" is no longer a dirty word.

And that's how it will be for RSS and news aggregators. Serendipitously, PeterMe is also thinking about how difficult aggregators are to use right now, but he accurately assesses how the functionality will be incorporated into other software (in a way that is similar to what is happening with blogs). It's also interesting to read Steven Bell's complaints in light of Yahoo's recent incorporation of a customizable RSS module for My Yahoo. It doesn't get much easier than My Yahoo in terms of customizing web sites, and it's a great visual for how you can bring content to you, instead of you needing the time to go out to it.

I find I have a second point I want to make. Steven Bell correctly notes that if you're only keeping up with a few web sites, then you don't need an aggregator. However, I know very few librarians who are trying to keep up with only a few sites. Most are also trying to read the local newspaper, a national newspaper, check in with their state library association, grant information, vendor enhancements, information about new worms and viruses, state and federal legislation, and 30 other topics. When you get to a certain information tipping point, you feel overwhelmed, and it's difficult to cope with 30 email newsletters amongst the 20 legitimate messages, 50 virus warnings, and 150 spams. For me, that is no longer efficient. Obviously Steven Bell and I have different information needs and methods for filling them, and you've probably got a totally different mix. As Steven Cohen emphasizes, find the mix that works for you.

The bottom line is that if you feel overwhelmed by information overload, then an aggregator may work well for you. Just like browsing sites online, using email, reading print journals, and asking your colleagues questions may work well for you. And I have yet to see anyone in print, at a conference, or in person advocate the use of aggregators to the exclusion of all else. I'd like to see evidence to the contrary.

* Addendum: I need to clarify I am not referring to any specific statements Steven Bell has made in the past (beyond this one article). I apologize if Steven or anyone else read the statement this way, as that was not my intent. I was trying to make a generalization that in 1996, I heard arguments similar to Steven's statements about aggregators, only they were about email and the web.

So to re-iterate, I've never read negative comments Steven has made about aggregators outside of this one specific article.

Kate, Clare, and I were just looking for this last weekend, because Clare is now a freshman in college. Thank heavens the Beloit College MindSet List for 2007 is finally out! Here are some of my favorites. [via Chicago Sun-Times]

• There has always been some association between fried eggs and your brain.
• They would never leave their calling card on someone’s desk.
• They have never been able to find the 'return' key.
• They have never gotten excited over a telegram, a long distance call, or a fax.
• Three-point shots from “downtown” have always been a part of basketball.
• Stores have always had scanners at the checkout.
• Adam and PC Junior computers had vanished from the market before this generation went online.
• They have always had a pin number.
• Directory assistance has never been free.
• They have always been able to make photocopies at home.
• They have always been able to make phone calls from planes."

And Kate, in particular, will appreciate the following quote:

"In April of the year the class of 2007 was born, Joseph Lelyveld complained in The New York Times that 'conversations with some young people around the country about the war in Vietnam will find their impressions of it to be remarkably dim.' High school juniors and seniors, could not identify Ho Chi Minh, Robert McNamara or the Chicago Seven."