"Copyright gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain." Source: Wikipedia

However, not every content must be fully protected,and the author may choose to easy the distribution or allow the collaboration (See Creative Commons licenses).

I'm following a new development in California schools.

In May 2009, The governor of California (Arnold Schwarzenegger) launched a initiative to compile open source textbooks for the state, in order to help cut costs and improve the quality of education. Governor Schwarzenegger said "The idea of open source textbooks is not new, but this could be the first statewide initiative to put open content in classrooms. The state's high-profile adoption of freely available open source textbook material could compel other states to follow and adopt similar initiatives. There are, however, many unanswered questions about the plan and how it will be implemented." "Books available for free to be used at public schools"

I mean.... the content of the public education should be public. Today, It's copyrighted and we pay for it. If you can not pay it, you can not access to the education.

So beyond the initial "cost-cutting" intention, at the end, the benefit will be greater.

Now (August/2009), in the Phase 1 Report, they inform "Of the 16 free digital textbooks for high school math and science reviewed, ten meet at least 90 percent of California’s standards. Four meet 100 percent of standards, including the CK-12 Foundation’s CK-12 Single Variable Calculus, CK-12 Trigonometry, CK-12 Chemistry and Dr. H. Jerome Keisler’s Elementary Calculus: An Infinitesimal Approach."

...

"This report helps districts identify the materials that best meet the needs of their students, providing them with additional options to maintain educational excellence during these difficult economic times and in the years to come. The reviewed digital textbooks are available for schools to use this fall."

...

"Since these digital books are downloadable and may be projected on a screen, viewed on a computer, printed chapter by chapter, or bound for use in the classroom, schools can take advantage of these free, standards-aligned resources using existing hardware - even in classrooms without computers or laptops for every student."

In the other hand, we can think there's no way to develop a business around Open Textbooks. It's not a long term trend, no economic ecosystem will grow and support this model..... BUT we already have a successful company. Flat World Knowledge raised $8 million in funding. Its business model is to offer the option for students and teachers to print textbooks in whole or part at a fraction of the cost of a standard hardbound college textbook. In addition it offers audio book versions, study guides, web quizzes and digital flash cards for a fee.

More about Flat World's numbers: ArsTechnica "Flat World schools textbook publishers with free Web editions"

Let's wee how the concept grows.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

The battle of SaaS vs. Premised-Based Software is just beginning. About TCO, I remember a decade ago, Microsoft was showing numbers about how convenient was to buy all software from them. Now, the SaaS marketing is based on several advantages of this model:

Capital savings: Software and Hardware IT operations savings Departmental / Business operations savings Additional areas in a complete TCO / ROI model These advantages are inherent of the OnDemand paradigm. However, each SaaS vendor will fix a price, as HIGH as possible, according to the target market. So, the previous theoretical advantages are not so obvious, and must be evaluated case by case.

For example, a small business has several options: they can install a small premised-based CRM, an open source CRM (like SugarCRM), choose the on-line Zoho CRM (free for 3 users), or try the top of the SaaS CRM industry (Salesforce). Which is the best TCO / ROI model for this customer ?

Also, the current Premised-Based software industry is going to fight lowering the prices. We can expect lower front payments, and better long-term deals from traditional players.

Again, in each situation, a complete scenario must be analyzed. In this article from Daniel Druker, Cloud / SaaS Total Cost of Ownership Framework, I have found a good starting point to a complete analysis.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

To enjoy a good lecture this weekend: The SaaS Business Model and Some Common Legal Questions

Bruce:  What key terms should a SaaS Agreement contain? Cary: SaaS agreements are typically subscription services agreements that address key customer concerns with: service levels, security, privacy, and ultimately performance. More detailed SaaS-specific issues include: how mid-term add-on user subscriptions are handled; the details of the renewal process; whether support is bundled in or extra; what usage rules apply to your users; and how third party services are made available through your service.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

"A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention." Source: Wikipedia.

The problem is what is a software patent... and the boundaries around it.

In the beginning, a mathematical formula or computer algorithm cannot be patented. But, according Software patents under United States patent law, It's patentable if it's part of a patentable "a structure or process".

Today, the lack of a right definition has produced a big mess of legal problems. Each country is a different history.

In the book "Patent Failure", patents performance was measured. A patent portfolio should create a positive incentive for innovation by enhancing the profits of companies that develop new technologies. In contrast, litigation costs exceed patent profits, that suggests the patent system is actually creating a net dis-incentive to innovation. In that case, innovative companies would be better off with no patent system at all. Bessen and Meurer's data shows litigation costs exceed profits by a wide margin (outside of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries). Without a clear software patent definition, patents are granted to every subject possible, even if it's a general obvious common sense between the skilled in the art. Today, if a software company is big and earning a good deal of money; sooner or later, it will be hit by a patent. The only defense is to begin acquiring patents, just in case; and hire good lawyers. For example, this week, a Texas judge is barring Microsoft from selling Microsoft Word due to alleged 'Custom XML' patent infringement.

This is a list of software patents. A typical classic example "Amazon.com sued Barnes & Noble for violating its "One click buy" but the case was ultimately settled. Amazon have so far failed to obtain a similar patent in Europe.". Yes, a patent for one-click buy button.

The software industry is creating "trust circles" to avoid litigation, based on licenses (like GPL3), with agreements between parties (like Novell-Microsoft), or with a specific network created to provide legal help Open Invention Network.

Of course, there is a lucrative patent industry, looking for patents, to claim royalties to any company with big pockets. For example: Myhrvold, ex-Microsoft CTO, created a kind of venture capital firm for ideas. It accumulates intellectual property in areas like communications, information technology and biotechnology, and then licenses the patents--meaning that its business model depends on robust patent laws, the stronger the better.

To increase the temperature, in the United States, the Supreme Court is reviewing the Bilski case. The decision may redefine the landscape. A very complex matter, since there's a lot of players with different point of view and acquired rights.

The two questions before the Supreme Court are whether or not a process must satisfy the particular machine or transformation test, and whether this test improperly excludes many business methods in spite of the wording of 35 U.S.C. 273, which specifically allows business-method patents.

Patently-O has a summary of the latest briefs from several actors, just a few:

• Yahoo The focus on physicality does not make sense in today's technology.
• IBM The proper test looks for a "technological contribution."
• Accenture Machine or transformation test is not a reliable indicator of anything relevant. The standard for patentability should “usefulness” as set forth in the Constitution, in the patent statute, and by the Court.

Wait, and see. No light at the end of the tunnel.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites