Tags
BY NICO VREELAND
Yesterday, Apple announced iBooks Author, a new Mac app that lets people create and distribute ebooks for the iPad. Immediately following the gleeful fanboygasms came the equally predictable backlash, like this piece in ZDNet that called the app’s end-user license agreement (EULA) “mind-bogglingly greedy and evil.”
This reaction confuses me, because iBooks Author’s EULA says exactly what I expected it to say, namely that you can’t sell the books you make with iBooks Author through any distributor except Apple.
Why is this even a surprise? For one thing, iBooks Author is free. It’s obviously intended to ease creation of content for sale through iTunes, because Apple makes a ton of money on those content sales. Why would they make a free tool that would let users create content for other platforms? Why is not doing so “greedy” and “evil”?
On a more practical level, it’s frankly not that big a deal. If you’re formatting a traditional book (i.e. only words), then the process should mostly involve cutting and pasting those words from your .doc file. You will have to format your ePubs for other distributors separately, which is a drag mostly because ePub-formatting programs suck (when we publish books here at C4, we use Smashwords; it’s not perfect but it is better and easier than other formatting and publishing options we’ve tried).
So yes, Apple has not given you a free, easy, universal ePub creator. But iBooks Author isn’t geared toward creating plain old ePubs anyway, it’s specifically geared toward creating “Multi-Touch books for iPad.” In other words, this sort of thing. Because iBooks Author simplifies the formatting process, the rich-media interactive ebooks you make with it will almost certainly only work on an iPad. Even if you could export them to universal ePubs, they would look like garbage on all other devices.
Apple won’t own your copyright, your content, or the versions you make for all other platforms. You’re free to use that content however you please, even according to that reactionary ZDNet writer’s reading of the EULA. Claims that “only Apple can ever publish your work” are simply not true.
So everybody please calm down about this EULA. It’s not nearly as greedy or evil as they’d have you believe.
The Chamber Four Archive 
Actually, it is that big of a deal.
Would you be ok with OpenOffice requiring everything you create with it that is to be sold be sold only through Oracle?
How about MS Office, Google Docs, etc? How about all these on-line services now restricting you to only distribute through their stores for everything you use their tools for?
The “free” argument is NOT a valid nor justifiable argument. apple will make money off ibooks with or without the restrictive clauses and they will make enough to pay for ibooks author and a whole lot more.
This is nothing more than apple being typical apple attempting a total lockin. This is far beyond anything anyone has attempted when it comes to lockin–use x software and you are required to sell via y only and only for z amount? Would you like my first born with that as well?
Get real!
Imagine signing with a publisher that then tells you, sorry but your book will not be sold for the price you wanted to recoup your efforts, and it will only be sold via our single outlet that requires a $500+ entrance fee for anyone that wants to purchase a book and at any time we can break that $500 “entrance fee” to require the user buy another $500+ entrance fee. . . oh and btw we are taking 30% of every sale and NO we are not going to do anything for you prior to that.
At least a publisher has some risk–they pay for the book’s editing, publishing, distribution, all upfront costs and often pay the writer upfront. This is often a very large investment in the writer.
Apple has NO risk here whatsoever, only profit to be made–don’t even argue that this tool is a big investment for apple. One tool that allows for infinite ibooks to be publishes and infinite writers to be locked in? Not to mention they’ve already paid for it via ibooks sold that were put there via other software.
Not to mention that this tool is only really usable for other formats if it is a very simple text which means, you didn’t need to use it in the first place. Apple wants you to use it and work in it, waste your time in their software and then publish–bang, you can’t publish it to another format because it’s only TXT or PDF = it will blow! Why the hell can’t they support epub3 so my time isn’t a total frickin’ waste?
Useless is what it is.
Start with epub 3 or HTML5–it has nearly everything apple is offering and then you can export to any format you like and apple can suck it because you didn’t use their precious to publish and you can choose your own price and distribution which allows you to access every single platform on the planet!
Apple apologist trying to say this is good or even OK have lost their friggin’ minds!
LikeLike
Hi Apple,
Thanks for stopping by and ostensibly reading this post, even though you obviously didn’t read it. Here’s a question you won’t read either: Have you actually used iBooks Author?
I’ve gotten pretty familiar with it, and it designs illustrated textbook-like ebooks exclusively for the iPad. The output you get will not work with any other device, not even an iPhone. It’s the equivalent of Xcode for app developers, it’s not a program, it’s a tool for iTunes content creation.
If you want something that creates plain ePub-3 compatible ebooks, you want an entirely different program. The EULA has nothing to do with your problem.
LikeLike
Oh, I did read the article. It isn’t that long to read. . .but nice assumption. But you clearly did not get my point, or maybe you just didn’t read it.
What you fail to gather is apple it attempting to own an author’s “work.”
your statement validates my point–ibooks author produces a proprietary ebook format that will ONLY work on the ipad so why does apple then need exclusivity to the author’s “work?” They don’t! they only need an agreement that you will not upload the ibook proprietary format (output) to anyone else. That’s not the wording they use is it? They use “any work”
ibooks author output is nearly the same as epub 3 btw–with a little hacking you can get it there.
So, if I sit down and do a lot of work to create a book in ibooks then that work is wasted because if I “publish” it via ibooks author then apple has exclusivity to the “work” I produced–not just the formatting, the “WORK.”
When and if apple comes out and specifically states that they are not claiming the “work” but only the specific proprietary file format be exclusive and the writer can take the “work” they put into ibooks author and create a non-ibooks proprietary book (essentially and identical book) and upload it to anyone else with all the same formatting then that’s fine. Otherwise, apple is claiming any actual work I do in ibooks author is theirs. That’s absurd! Free software or not.
Nowhere did I say that ibooks isn’t done well and that apple did not make a good ebook publishing tool. My issue is with apple attempting to take exclusivity over my “work” and then locking me into only one distribution path.
Sure, if they want to pay me an advancement like a publisher before I start on my “work” then we can talk exclusivity.
Hope that clarifies things for you.
“any work” != formatting only (ibook proprietary file format)
LikeLike
Let me rephrase it this way. . .
You are saying it would be OK, and you would be just fine with it, if Microsoft gave away Windows with the requirement that, “any work” produced using Windows can ONLY be sold via Microsoft’s Marketplace and Microsoft gets a 30% cut?
Sure you would be OK with that, right 😉
After all they are giving you free tools thus they should be able to have exclusivity to your work.
LikeLike
OK, you’re confused about the definition of the term “Work.” It actually DOES mean just the formatting. You can take the content of your book and format it in another program and you’re free to distribute that however you like. Even if you’re writing directly into this program (which would be kind of dumb because that’s not what it’s for), Apple cannot take your copyrights or intellectual property, or anything other than the FORMATTING work you do in iBooks Author.
They also don’t “own” your formatted iBook, they just require that you distribute it through iTunes. The reason they specify this (which IS redundant, because these books will only work on the iPad), is because it’s an anal-retentive legal agreement.
If you’re taking the time to crack files and adapt some weird proprietary format into epub, maybe that time would be better spent finding a program that just makes epubs. Again, if you want something different than an iPad book-formatter that uploads books to iTunes, you need a different program, not a different EULA.
LikeLike
No, I’m not confused about the definition of “Work.” Apple is, once again, being very vague in their definitons.
Here’s a discussion about it
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1311769
From the EULA:
“IMPORTANT NOTE: If you charge a fee for any book or other work you generate using this software (a “Work”), you may only sell or distribute such Work through Apple (e.g., through the iBookstore) and such distribution will be subj”
Sure does sound like they are going to pretty much “own” it. Since you can only sell through them, will have to sign more agreements, and they can banish it whenever and for whatever reason they wish and you still can’t sell it anywhere else = they effectively “own” it. Nowhere do they define it as the “proprietary format” or “formatting applied by ibooks author” — it’s the “entire output” which includes anything you have written or put into ibooks author. And you know full well if it was just the formatting apple would have already released a press statement clarifying the issue.
Furthermore, why can’t I use my time and energy that I put into ibooks author to produce a product for another platform if I can convert it? Apple isn’t making that conversion tool. Your argument is flawed in so many ways. Your basically saying that no company should be able to convert any other format to another format to be utilized anywhere else just because the original software was free and therefore that company has rights to your time and energy that you put into using their software.
Finally, even if you are correct. We, as a society/people, cannot allow companies to begin down this slippery slope–that whatever you do in their product MUST be sold ONLY via their distribution network.
First ibooks, then MS Office, then every software will require that whatever you do in that software is tied exclusively to that company, then hardware companies will do the same, etc. . .
Anyone that thinks this is OK or good seriously need to re-evaluate things. Even if the product is given away freely or not.
And your argument is, it’s OK because it’s free? But you wouldn’t say that if MS does it with Windows, will you–imagine all that is done on Windows and MS having sole distribution rights to all of that.
Isn’t it enough that it is a proprietary format? Can’t apple just insist that the proprietary format be ONLY sold via ibooks without these other requirements? Yes, the could but they are attempting something else entirely.
The only conclusion one can come to via your arguments is, ibooks author is a non-starter.
Your trying to turn this into, “well since it’s designed to only spit out ibooks compatible books then it doesn’t matter. Just use something else.” It does matter! even if it only produces that one proprietary format–apple has NO right to your time and energy = work–even if it was in their software.
This is the “sell your soul for ____” mentality, and it’s unbelievable that people are supporting & justifying it. Unbelievable!
LikeLike
here’s another discussion about the definition of “Work” apple is using in the EULA.
https://plus.google.com/114729649424694267334/posts/iN6sF8UVjhP
OK. . .I’m done.
LikeLike
If apple somehow does want exclusivity over the content of books, then you’re right, it’s a horrible deal. We’ll find out for sure soon enough, we’re laying out previously published books with iBooks author right now.
With all the bullshit apple pulls, it figures this non-issue is the one all the internet trolls get twisted over.
LikeLike
Even if apple would “own” the content you “generate” with this app, you do not generate writing or photography with it, you only format it. The ONLY work generated here is the formatting. Again, you could’ve saved yourself time by using the program.
LikeLike
More on why your reaction is an overreaction: http://www.cultofmac.com/141832/why-the-emotional-criticism-of-ibooks-author-is-wrong/
http://www.itnewspost.com/technology/ibooks-author-apple-doesnt-want-to-own-your-book/
LikeLike
Nico,
From what I’ve gathered reading as much about this as I can find it does seem that apple is trying to have exclusive rights to the entire book however, law experts aren’t sure if it will hold up in court. However, are you going to sue apple to allow your book on other providers? Most authors can’t because they don’t have the financial ability go up against apple. And this is the key–apple will send every other ebook vendor a letter when they find your book elsewhere and tell them to remove it, and they will remove it because your little book just isn’t worth the fight with apple. Thus, your book, regardless of how the content originated, will only be on iBooks because you used iBooks Author and submitted to the app store = you gave exclusivity to apple for that book. This seems to be the ONLY way apple can keep iBooks Author exported books from ending up on other stores–you know there will be conversion tools out asap and apple can’t allow that, or rather they want to prevent those conversion tool from accomplishing anything.
However, none of that is the real issue here. The issue is that they are trying to “lock-in” your time & energy used via their software.
I’m pretty sure you would not be happy when EVERY single software vendor does this exact same thing for ALL software–you won’t be able to use anything without some type of exclusivity tied to the software vendor. That’s insane! If I use anything from Abobe and then it MUST go through their app store, anything form MS goes through theirs, etc.. . .
Not even the most zealot apple defender can look at that situation and say that it would be a good thing. And if apple is allowed to get away with it then others will try to do it as well. You know they will. This is why I’m so against the iBooks Author EULA.
LikeLike
It’s not the same thing at all. For one, the aggressive price cap and encouragement for releasing free books shows they are much more interested in propagating more widespread interest in the use and creation of iBooks in order to build an install base that can better rival Amazon than anything else. For two, this is basically an SDK kit for creating iPad books. It’s only use is to create iBooks formats of books. All apps that are usable on iPhones must go through Apple certification agree to giving Apple a cut, or else they must only work for jailbroken phones, which for most technically violates a term of service. This isn’t any different. (In fact, putting an app into iTunes involves a similar exclusivity agreement; that doesn’t stop games and other programs from appearing on more places than just iOS. You’ll note the guy that wrote that article in the link expresses similar concerns to yours, which have since turned out unfounded.)
Apple owns a popular and useful distribution channel. They have released some free software to allow those that want to to have use of that in return for a cut. It is in no way out of line for them to add a clause saying the product of that free software must be used exclusively in creation of products for their store. That doesn’t mean you can’t create an Android version of that same book. It means you can’t create something with their software, then circumvent them in order to sell it via some other channel. Most tech companies sell SDKs for money, in some cases quite a bit, this is essentially the same thing, but priced inside out.
For many people, this is a good thing, it allows for experimentation at no initial cost (and with must less required technical prowess). Apple isn’t going to wrestle a bunch of copyrights from amateur authors, it doesn’t get them anywhere. Yeah, their goal is to lock people in, that’s the express goal of every company in existence. But there are still other ways to create content for iPad without using iBooks Author. To expect them to deliver a piece of development software (a good one in fact) and not expect anything in return is unreasonable.
LikeLike
Gruber admits that he overreacted to the EULA: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/01/23/ibooks-bjarnason
It seems that the only thing that clause in the EULA prevents is people selling their iPad-only books outside the iTunes store.
And it does not look like it would be so easy to crack after all. It would most likely be easier to use a different program.
LikeLike
Title says it all: “iBooks Author owns your format, not your content”
http://www.tuaw.com/2012/01/24/apple-moves-open-standards-forward-with-ibooks-author-formats/
LikeLike
And even if Apple wanted your copyright and your first-born, and a blood sacrifice, this thing most likely wouldn’t hold up in court. http://www.thepassivevoice.com/01/2012/is-apples-dismal-ibooks-author-software-license-even-enforceable/
LikeLike
Apple clarifies that it doesn’t own your books. That’s the end of this debate.
http://www.tuaw.com/2012/02/03/ibooks-author-1-01-out-with-updated-eula/
LikeLike